// -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
.dt The Project Gutenberg eBook of Memorabilia; or, Recollections, Historical, Biographical and Antiquarian, by James Savage
.pn on
.pn link
.de div.tnotes { padding-left:1em;padding-right:1em;background-color:#E3E4FA;border:1px solid silver;margin:1em 5% 0 5%;text-align:justify;}
.de abbr {border:none; text-decoration:none; font-variant:normal;}
// verse
.dm verse-start
.in +4
.sp 1
.fs 95%
.nf b
.dm-
.dm verse-end
.nf-
.fs 100%
.in -4
.sp 1
.dm-
// letter
.dm letter-start
.sp 1
.in +4
.dm-

.dm letter-end
.in -4
.sp 1
.dm-

.if h
.il fn=cover.jpg w=440px
.pb
.if-
.sp 4
.h1
MEMORABILIA.
// File: 002.png
// File: 003.png
.sp 4
.nf c
<xxl><B>MEMORABILIA;</B></xxl>

<xl><B>OR</B></xl>

<xxl><B><i>RECOLLECTIONS</i>,</B></xxl>

<xxl><B>HISTORICAL, BIOGRAPHICAL,</B></xxl>

<xxl><B>AND</B></xxl>

<xxl><B>Antiquarian,</B></xxl>

<sc>By</sc> <xxl><B>JAMES SAVAGE.</B></xxl>


TAUNTON:

PRINTED FOR JAMES SAVAGE,
AND SOLD BY
J. POOLE, BOOKSELLER, FORE-STREET, <sc>AND</sc>
BY BALDWIN, CRADOCK, & JOY, PATERNOSTER ROW,
LONDON.

1820.
.nf-
// File: 004.png
.sp 4
.nf c
TAUNTON:
PRINTED BY J. POOLE, FORE-STREET.
.nf-
// File: 005.png
.sp 4
.h2
ADVERTISEMENT.
.sp 2
The following pages have been compiled from various
sources, and from an extensive course of reading. The
Editor has in some instances placed his authorities in the
notes at the bottom of the page; and, where he has copied
from former writers, he has inserted the names of those from
whom he has borrowed his materials. His chief object has
been to confine himself to facts; he has therefore carefully
avoided giving opinions upon, or drawing conclusions from, the
various subjects of which he has treated. He has endeavoured
to place many points of history in a new light, and in every
part to illustrate, in some degree, the several matters which
have occupied his attention. It has been his desire to present
the reader with a volume, from which he hopes both instruction
and amusement may be drawn, and he submits it with
confidence, to the perusal of young persons in particular,
as a collection of biographical and historical Miscellanea,
calculated to beguile the tedium of an hour, without inculcating
a single idea that may sully the purest mind.

<i>Taunton, May 31st, 1820.</i>
// File: 006.png
// File: 007.png
.sp 4
.h2
CONTENTS.
.sp 2

#Anecdotes of Dr. Kennicott:art01#,      #1#

#Remarkable Historical Coincidences:art02#,      #4#

#Charles <abbr rend=arabic>XII.</abbr> of Sweden:art03#,      #6#

#British Pearls:art04#,      #8#

#Pillars of Commemoration:art05#,      #9#

#Mason, the Poet:art06#,      #13#

#Bishops of Sodor and Man:art07#,      #17#

#The Table:art08#,      #19#

#Clocks:art09#,      #20#

#Aldus Manutius:art10#,      #22#

#Bottles of Skin:art11#,      #24#

#English Slave Trade:art12#,      #25#

#Oliver Cromwell’s Wife:art13#,      #26#

#Shakespeare:art14#,      #28#

#University Degrees:art15#,      #31#

#Guy Carleton, Lord Dorchester:art16#,      #33#

#Figs:art17#,      #35#

#Fruits cultivated at Rome in the time of Pliny, that are now grown in our English gardens:art18#,      #37#

#Peacocks:art19#,      #51#

#Ancient Libraries:art20#,      #52#

#King Charles the First:art21#,      #58#

#The Fair Geraldine and the Earl of Surrey:art22#,      #60#

#Jews in England:art23#,      #66#

#The English Bible:art24#,      #67#

#Luxury of Ancient Rome:art25#,      #68#

#Rhyme:art26#,      #70#

#Mr. Coquebert de Montbret:art27#,      #72#

#Dr. Thomas Pierce:art28#,      #73#

#Writing among the Greeks:art29#,      #74#

#Account of the Scriptoria, or Writing Rooms in the Monasteries of England:art30#,      #76#

#Torture in England:art34#,      #105#

#Dr. Johnson’s Conversation with the late King:art35#,      #114#

#Dr. Beattie’s Conversation with the late King & Queen:art36#,      #121#

#Sacred Gardens:art37#,      #128#

#Sir Thomas Wyat:art38#,      #129#
// File: 008.png

#The Hand, a Symbol of Power:art39#,      #132#

#Henrietta Maria, Queen of Charles I:art40#,      #135#

#Last Moments of Philip Melancthon:art41#,      #142#

#House of Commons:art42#,      #145#

#Mosaic Painting:art43#,      #165#

#King Egbert:art44#,      #168#

#The Latin Language:art45#,      #171#

#Dr. Herschel:art46#,      #174#

#Parodies:art47#,      #177#

#Mourning for the Dead:art48#,      #178#

#Garrick:art49#,      #179#

#Lemons:art50#,      #181#

#Origin of the Point of Honour:art51#,      #182#

#Geoffrey of Monmouth:art52#,      #185#

#Lifting up the Hand in Swearing:art54#,      #205#

#Villiers, Duke of Buckingham:art55#,      #207#

#King Arthur:art56#,      #210#

#Alchemy:art57#,      #213#

#Account of several Noble Families, in England, who\
owe their elevation to the Peerage to their Ancestors\
having been engaged in Trade:art58#,      #214#

#Last Moments of Queen Caroline:art59#,      #220#

#The Britons, according to the Greek and Latin Classics:art60#,      #221#

#The Seven Sleepers:art62#,      #227#

#John Ray, the Naturalist:art63#,      #230#

#London Bankers and their Origin:art65#,      #233#

#Elucidation of the Ornaments with which the Greeks and\
Romans adorned the Human Head on Coins & Medals:art66#,      #237#

#The Tradescants:art67#,      #243#

#Orange Trees:art68#,      #249#

#Articles of Use and Luxury introduced into Europe by\
the Romans:art69#,      #251#

#Account of the Escape of the Earl of Nithsdale from the\
Tower, in 1716:art70#,      #255#

#Account of the first rise of Fairs in England, and the\
Manner of Living, in the <abbr=sixteenth>16th</abbr> and <abbr=seventeenth>17th</abbr> Centuries:art71#,      #269#

#Sir Richard Clough:art72#,      #277#

#Royal Clemency:art73#,      #279#

#Lotteries:art74#,      #280#

#Herculaneum Manuscripts:art75#,      #283#

#Wolves in England:art76#,      #286#

#Professor Porson:art77#,      #288#

#History of Sepulchral Monuments:art78#,      #297#
// File: 009.png
.pn 1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art01
Dr. KENNICOTT.
.sp 2
Dr. Kennicott was the son of the parish
clerk of Totness, once master of a charity school
in that town. At an early age young Kennicott
took the care of the school, and in that situation
wrote some verses, addressed to the <abbr=honourable>Hon.</abbr> Mrs.
Courtenay, which recommended him to her
notice, and to that of many neighbouring gentlemen,
who laudably opened a subscription to send
him to Oxford.

.pm letter-start
<i>The following inscription, written by Dr. Kennicott, is
engraven on the tomb of his parents</i>:
.pm letter-end

.pm verse-start
As Virtue should be of good Report,
Sacred be this humble Monument to the Memory of
BENJAMIN KENNICOTT,
Parish Clerk of Totness,
and ELIZABETH his Wife;
The latter an example of every Christian Duty,
The former animated with the warmest zeal, regulated by the
best good sense, and both constantly exerted
for the salvation of himself and others.
Reader! soon shalt thou die also;
And as a Candidate for Immortality, strike thy breast and say,
“Let me live the life of the righteous,that my
latter end may be like his.”
Trifling are the dates of Time, where the subject is Eternity.
Erected by their Son, <abbr rend=spell>B.</abbr> Kennicott, <abbr rend=spell>D. D.</abbr>
Canon of Christ Church, Oxford.
.pm verse-end
// File: 010.png
.pn +1

It is said that when Dr. Kennicott took orders,
he came to officiate in his clerical capacity in his
native town,—when his father, as parish clerk,
proceeded to place the surplice on his shoulders,
a struggle ensued between the modesty of the
son and the honest pride of the parent, who insisted
on paying that respect to his son which he had
been accustomed to shew to other clergymen; to
this filial obedience he was obliged to submit.
A circumstance is added, that his mother had
often declared she should never be able to support
the joy of hearing her son preach; and that
on her attendance at the church, for the first time,
she was so overcome as to be taken out in a state
of temporary insensibility.

.tb

.pm letter-start
<i>The following Letter from Dr. Kennicott to the Rev. William
Daddo has been preserved</i>:

“<i>To the Rev. Mr. Daddo, in Tiverton, Devon.</i>

“<i>Wadh. Coll. <abbr=march>Mar.</abbr> 30, 1744.</i>

“<abbr=Reverend>Rev.</abbr> and <abbr=honourable>Hon.</abbr> Sir,

“Gratitude to benefactors is the great law of
nature, and lest I should violate what was ever
sacred, I presume to lay the following before you.

“There are, Sir, in the world, gentlemen who
confine their regards to self, or the circle of their
own acquaintance, and there are (happy experience
// File: 011.png
.pn +1
convinces me) who command their influence
to enlarge and exert itself on persons remotely
situate, both by fortune and education. To you,
Sir, belongs the honour of this encomium,—to
me the pleasure of the obligation, and as I am
now first at leisure in the place whither your
goodness has transplanted me, I lay this acknowledgment
before you, as one of the movers in this
system of exalted generosity; for when I consider
myself as surrounded with benefactors, there
seems a bright resemblance of the now exploded
system of Ptolemy, in which, Sir, (you know)
the heavenly bodies revolved around the central
earth which was thus rendered completely blest
by the contribution of their cheering and benign
influence.

“And now, Sir, the sentiments of duty rise so
warm within me, that every expression of thanks
seems faint, and I am lost in endeavours after a
suitable acknowledgment of my obligations.

“But I know, Sir, whom I am now addressing;
I know those who most deserve can least bear
praise, and that your goodness is so great, as even
to reject the very thanks of the grateful; like
the sun in its splendour, which forbids the eye
that offers to admire it.

“That Heaven may reward yourself and Mrs.
Daddo with its best favours, and console you
under your parental sorrows, is my daily and
fervent prayer; and I shall esteem it one of the
// File: 012.png
.pn +1
great honours of my life to be favoured at your
leisure with any commands or advices you shall
condescend to bestow on

<abbr=Reverend>Rev.</abbr> Sir,

Your dutiful and obliged Servant,

BENJAMIN KENNICOTT.”
.pm letter-end

.tb

The <abbr=Reverend>Rev.</abbr> William Daddo was for many years
head-master of Blundell’s Free School, in Tiverton,
where young Kennicott received the rudiments
of his classical education. Mr. Daddo
having acquired a considerable fortune from the
emoluments of his school, quitted Tiverton, and
retired to Bow-hill House, in the neighbourhood
of Exeter, and there died many years ago, leaving
a daughter, an only child, afterwards married to
the <abbr=Reverend>Rev.</abbr> Mr. Terry.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art02
REMARKABLE HISTORICAL COINCIDENCES.
.sp 2
Among the curiosities in the British Museum
are shewn two helmets; the one Roman, found
in the ground on which the battle of Cannæ was
fought, 216 years before Christ, and the other
made of feathers, brought from one of the South
Sea Islands, by Captain Cook. On comparing
these helmets, the shape will be found exactly
// File: 013.png
.pn +1
similar, though the latter was made by an uncivilized
people living at the distance of more
than 2000 years since the battle of Cannæ was
fought, and who had never even heard of the
Roman name.

A second coincidence is found in the same
collection. Two breast-plates are shewn to the
visitors, exactly corresponding in uniformity of
shape, though made of different materials, the one
taken from the bosom of an Egyptian Mummy,
which had been dissected, if I may be allowed
to use the term, in the Museum, and the other
brought by Captain Cook, among various other
curiosities, from the South Sea Islands.

A third coincidence is the mode of cookery
practised by the South Sea Islanders as described
by Captain Cook, especially in roasting their
hogs. This is by means of hot stones placed in
a hole dug in the ground. In Ossian’s Poems
the reader will find that the Caledonians of that
time made use of the same method in cooking
their hogs for the table.

The extinction of the Roman Empire in the
West, about the year 476, by Odoacer, King of
Italy, was attended by one of the most memorable
coincidences in the history of mankind.
The patrician Orestes had married the daughter
of Count <i>Romulus</i>, of Petovio in Noricum; the
name of <i>Augustus</i>, notwithstanding the jealousy
of power, was known at Aquileia as a familial
// File: 014.png
.pn +1
surname; and the appellations of the two great
founders, the first of the city of Rome, and the
second of the Roman monarchy, were strangely
united in the last of their successors. The son of
Orestes succeeded to the throne of the Western
Empire, and assumed and disgraced the names
of <sc>Romulus Augustus</sc>; the first was corrupted
into Momyllus by the Greeks, and the second
has been changed by the Latins into the contemptible
diminutive Augustulus. The life of this
inoffensive youth, the last Sovereign of the Roman
Empire in the West, was spared by the generous
clemency of Odoacer, who dismissed him, with
his whole family, from the imperial palace, fixed
his annual allowance at 6000 pieces of Gold, and
assigned the castle of Lucullus, in Campania, for
the place of his exile or retirement.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art03
CHARLES <abbr=twelve>XII.</abbr> OF SWEDEN.
.sp 2
That Charles the twelfth did not fall by a
shot from the walls of Fredericshall, as is commonly
supposed, but met his death from a nearer
and more secret hand, has been fully ascertained;
and <abbr rend=spell>M.</abbr> Megret, a French Engineer, who accompanied
him, was, no doubt, concerned in the
// File: 015.png
.pn +1
murder. Many years afterwards, one Cronsted,
an officer, on his death bed, confessed that he had
himself, at the instigation of the Prince of Hesse,
brother-in-law of Charles, and whose wife was
declared Queen of Sweden, fired the shot that
killed the unfortunate monarch.

In the arsenal at Stockholm, the Swedes preserve,
with great care, the clothes he was habited
in at the time he fell. The coat is a plain blue
cloth regimental one, such as every common soldier
wore. Round the waist he had a broad buff
leathern belt, in which hung his sword. The hat
is torn only about an inch square, in that part of
it which lies over the temple, and certainly would
have been much more injured by a large shot.
His gloves are of very fine leather, and as the left
one is perfectly clean and unsoiled could only
have been newly put on. Voltaire says that the
instant the King received the shot, he had the
force and courage to put his hand to his sword,
and lay in that posture. The right hand glove
is covered in the inside with blood, and the belt
at that part where the hilt of his sword lay, is
likewise bloody, so that it seems clear, he had
previously put his hand to his head, on receiving
the shot, before he attempted to draw his sword
and make resistance.

In the same case that contains his clothes is
preserved the cap he wore on the terrible day at
Bender, when he so desperately defended himself
// File: 016.png
.pn +1
against the Turks. It is of fur; and has one tremendous
cut on the side, which must have been
within a hair’s breadth of there ending the career
of this wonderful man.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art04
BRITISH PEARLS.
.sp 2
The River Conway in North Wales was of
considerable importance, even before the Roman
invasion, for the Pearl muscle, (the <i>Mya Margaritifera</i>
of Linnæus) and Suetonius acknowledged,
that one of his inducements for undertaking
the subjugation of Wales, was the Pearl
Fishery carried forwards in that river. According
to Pliny, the muscles, called by the natives
<i>Kregindilin</i>, were sought for with avidity by the
Romans, and the pearls found within them were
highly valued; in proof of which it is asserted,
that Julius Cæsar, dedicated a breastplate set
with British Pearls to Venus Genetrix, and placed
it in her temple at Rome. A fine specimen from
the Conway is said to have been presented to
Catherine, consort of Charles <abbr='the second'>II.</abbr> by Sir Richard
Wynne of Gwydir; and it is further said that it
has since contributed to adorn the regal crown
of England. Lady Newborough possessed a
good collection of the Conway pearls, which she
purchased of those who were fortunate enough to
// File: 017.png
.pn +1
find them, as there is no regular fishery at present.
The late Sir Robert Vaughan had obtained a
sufficient number to appear at Court, with a
button and loop to his hat, formed of these beautiful
productions, about the year 1780.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art05
PILLARS OF COMMEMORATION.
.sp 2
The erection of a column or pillar, on the
highest point of that ridge of hills, called Blackdown,
which separates the county of Somerset
from that of Devon, in commemoration of the great
victories obtained by the Duke of Wellington,
is an inducement to look into history, to see how
the nations of antiquity, particularly those of
Greece and Rome, rewarded their heroes who
signalized themselves by the performance of feats
of military courage, valour, and skill.

Among the Grecians it was usual to confer
honours and rewards upon those who distinguished
themselves in battle by valiant and courageous
conduct. The ordinary rewards presented to conquerors
in all the states of Greece, were crowns,
which were sometimes inscribed with the person’s
name and actions that had merited them, as appears
from the inscription upon the crown presented
by the Athenians to Conon. The Athenians
sometimes honoured those who had performed
// File: 018.png
.pn +1
great actions with permission to raise pillars, or
erect statues to the gods, with inscriptions declaring
their victories. Plutarch, however, supposes
this to have been a grant rarely yielded to the
greatest commanders. Cimon, who commanded
the Athenian fleet against the Persians, became
master of the city of Eion, in Thrace, and was,
on account of his not imitating former commanders,
by standing upon the defensive, but
repulsing the enemy, and carrying the war into
their own country, highly respected and admired
by his countrymen, who allowed him, in honour
of his success over the enemy, to erect three
pillars of stone or marble, each surmounted with
the head of Mercury; but though they bore an
inscription, Cimon was not permitted to inscribe
his name upon them. These pillars were considered
by his contemporaries as the highest honour
which had then been conferred upon any commander.

Various Pillars were erected at Rome in honour
of great men, and to commemorate illustrious
actions. Thus there were the <i>Columna Ænea</i>, a
pillar of Brass, on which a league with the Latins
was written. The <i>Columna Rostrata</i>, the Rostral
Column, erected in the Forum, in honour of
Duillius, was adorned with figures of ships, and
was constructed of white marble. This column
is still remaining with its inscription. It was
built in honour of a great victory gained by
// File: 019.png
.pn +1
Duillius over the Carthaginian fleet near Lipara,
in the first Punic war. Another Pillar was
erected by M. Fulvius, the Consul, consisting of
one stone of Numidian marble, nearly 20 feet
high.

But the most remarkable columns were those
of <i>Trajan</i> and <i>Antoninus Pius</i>.

Trajan’s Pillar was erected in the middle of his
Forum, and was composed of twenty-four great
pieces of marble, but so curiously cemented as to
seem but one. Its height is 128 feet. It is
about 12 feet in diameter at the bottom, and 10
at the top. It has in the inside 185 steps for ascending
to the top, and forty windows for the
admission of light. The whole pillar is incrusted
with marble, on which are represented the warlike
exploits of that Emperor and his army, particularly
in Dacia. On the top was a Colossal figure of
Trajan, holding in his left hand a sceptre, and in
his right a hollow globe of gold, in which his
ashes were put, but Eutropius affirms that his
ashes were put under the pillar.

The pillar of Antoninus was erected after his
death, by the Senate, in honour of his memory.
It is 176 feet high, the steps of ascent 106, and
the windows 56. The sculpture and other ornaments
are much of the same kind with those of
Trajan’s pillar, but the work is greatly inferior.

Both these pillars are still standing, and justly
reckoned among the most precious remains of
// File: 020.png
.pn +1
antiquity. Pope Sixtus <abbr='the fifth'>V.</abbr> instead of the statues
of the Emperors, caused the statue of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Peter
to be erected on Trajan’s pillar, and of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Paul
on that of Antoninus.

Pompey’s Pillar, as it is commonly called,
in the city of Alexandria in Egypt, is equally
celebrated with the two just mentioned. It is
composed of red granite. The base is a square
of about 15 feet on each side; this block of
marble, 60 feet in circumference, rests on two
layers of stone bound together with lead. The
shaft and the upper member of the base are of
one piece of 90 feet long, and nine in diameter.
The capital is corinthian, with palm leaves, and
not indented; it is 9 feet high. The whole
column is 114 feet in height. It is perfectly
well polished, and only a little shivered on the
eastern side. Nothing can equal the majesty of
this column; seen from a distance it overtops the
town, and serves as a signal for vessels. Approaching
it nearer, it produces astonishment
mixed with awe. The eye can never be tired
with admiring the beauty of the capital, the
length of the shaft, nor the extraordinary simplicity
of the pedestal.

Among the first inhabitants of the world after
the flood there were pillars erected sacred to the
Pythonic god, Apollo, or the Sun. These pillars
had curious hieroglyphical inscriptions; they
were very lofty and narrow in comparison of
// File: 021.png
.pn +1
their length; hence among the Greeks, who
copied from the Egyptians, every thing gradually
tapering to a point was stiled an Obelisk.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art06
MASON THE POET.
.sp 2
The merit of this gentleman as a poet is well
known. However he was not satisfied with the
applause he received in that character; he was
desirous also of being esteemed a good musician
and a good painter. In music he succeeded
better than in painting. He performed decently
on the harpsichord, and by desire, I undertook,
says Dr. Miller, in the History of Doncaster, to
teach him the principles of composition; but
that I never could effect. Indeed, others before
me had failed in the attempt, nevertheless he
fancied himself qualified to compose; for a short
Anthem of his, beginning “<sc>Lord</sc> of all power
and might,” was performed at the Chapel Royal,
of which only the melody was his own; the bass
was composed by another person. The same
may be said of two more Anthems, sung in the
Cathedral of York. In painting he never arrived
even to a degree of mediocrity; so true is
Pope’s observation:

.pm verse-start
“One science only will one genius fit,
”So vast is art, so narrow human wit.”
.pm verse-end
// File: 022.png
.pn +1

Fond, however, of being considered as a patron
both of music and painting, he contributed to the
advancement of several young men by his recommendation:
yet I never knew him patronize
but one, in either of these arts, whom he did not
desert afterwards, without his former favourite
ever knowing in what he had offended him.

“When young,” says Dr. Miller, “I was
one of those he took under his protection. He
permitted me to dedicate the music of some
elegies to him, and also gave me pieces of his
own writing to set to music, particularly the
‘Ode to Death’ in Caractacus. However, at
the end of a few years, I found myself involved
in the disgrace of others, though I never knew
the cause of my dismissal; most probably our
disgrace proceeded from the envy of some officious
tale-bearer. On recollection, I have often
observed him listen attentively to these characters;
and his favourite servant had it in his power
to lead him which way he pleased, even to the
changing a former acquaintance as easily as he
would change his coat. Rather late in life he
married Miss Sharman, of Hull, which was his
native place. The reason he assigned for making
her an offer of marriage was, that he had been a
whole evening in her company with others, and
observed, that during all that time she never
spoke a single word. This lady lived about a
year after their marriage. She died at Bristol,
// File: 023.png
.pn +1
where, in the Cathedral, he placed a handsome
monument to her memory, on which are inscribed
some beautiful and much-admired lines as an
epitaph. During the short time this lady lived
with him, he appeared more animated and agreeable
in his conversation; but after her decease,
his former phlegm returned, and he became
silent, sullen, and reserved.

“Though he had a good income, and was by
no means extravagant, yet he frequently fancied
himself poor, to that degree, that he once asked
an acquaintance to lend him a hundred pounds,
though at that very time he had considerable
sums of money in the public funds, for which he
neglected taking the interest. A great attachment
appeared to exist between him and a very
hospitable family in the neighbourhood of Doncaster,
to whom he was nearly related, and with
whom he used to pass some months in the
summer. At length he fancied they expected to
receive a good legacy at his decease, but resolving
to disappoint them, he did not even mention
them in his will, but left the greater part of his
property to a person who had formerly been his
curate.”

.tb

.pm letter-start
<i>The following Letter from Mason to Dr. Beattie, is preserved
in Sir William Forbes’s Life of the latter</i>:

<i>York, <abbr=seventeenth>17th</abbr> October, 1771.</i>

“In my late melancholy employment of reviewing
and arranging the papers, which dear
// File: 024.png
.pn +1
Mr. Gray’s friendship bequeathed to my care, I
have found nine letters of yours, which I meant
to have returned ere this, had I found a safe opportunity
by a private hand; but as no such opportunity
has yet occurred, I take the liberty of
troubling you with this, to enquire how I may
best convey them to you. I shall continue here
till the <abbr=twelfth>12th</abbr> of next month, and hope in that
interval to be favoured with a line from you upon
this subject.

“I should deprive myself of a very sincere
gratification, if I finished this letter, with the
business that occasions it. You must suffer me to
thank you for the very high degree of poetical
pleasure which the first book of your ‘Minstrel’
gave my imagination, and that equal degree of
rational conviction which your ‘Essay on the
Immutability of Truth’ impressed on my understanding.
I will freely own to you, that the
very idea of a Scotsman’s attacking Mr. Hume,
prejudiced me so much in favour of the latter
piece, that I should have approved it, if, instead
of a masterly, it had been only a moderate performance.

“I shall be happy to know, that the remaining
books of your ‘Minstrel’ are likely to be
published soon. The next best thing, after instructing
the world profitably, is to amuse it
innocently. England has lost that man, (Mr.
Gray) who, of all others in it, was best qualified
// File: 025.png
.pn +1
for both these purposes; but who, from early
chagrin and disappointment, had imbibed a disinclination
to employ his talents beyond the
sphere of self-satisfaction and improvement.
May Scotland long possess, in you, a person both
qualified and willing to exert his, for the pleasure
and benefit of society.”
.pm letter-end
.sp 4
.h2 id=art07
BISHOPS OF SODOR AND MAN.
.sp 2
The Bishopric of Sodor and Man was first
erected by Pope Gregory <abbr='the fourth'>IV</abbr>, about the year 840,
and had for its diocese the Isle of Man and all
the Hebrides or Western Islands of Scotland;
but when the Isle of Man became dependent
upon the kingdom of England, the Western
Islands withdrew themselves from the obedience
of their Bishop, and had Bishops of their own,
whom they entitled <i>Episcopi Sodorenses</i>, but commonly
Bishops of the Isles. The Prelates of the
diocese of the Isles had three places of residence,
namely, the Isle of Icolumkill, Man, and Bute;
and in ancient writs, are promiscuously styled
<i>Episcopi Manniæ et Insularum</i>, <i>Episcopi Æbudarum</i>,
and <i>Episcopi Sodorenses</i>, which last title
is still retained by the Bishops of the Isle of Man;
and the reason of this style is as follows: The
Island of Ily, or I, or Ionah, was in former ages
// File: 026.png
.pn +1
a place famous for sanctity and learning, and
very early became the seat of a Bishop. This
little Island was likewise denominated Icolumkill,
from <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Columba (the companion of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr>
Patrick) founding a monastery here in the sixth
century, which was the mother of above one hundred
other monasteries situated in different parts
of Britain and Ireland. From the many learned
men who came to study here, the Picts and English
Saxons of the North owe their conversion to
Christianity. The Scots used long ago to commit
the education of the presumptive heir of the
crown to the care of the Bishops of this see; and
so holy was the Island of Icolumkill reckoned,
that most of the Scottish monarchs were interred
there. The Cathedral church was dedicated to
our Saviour, for whom the Greek word is <i>Soter</i>,
hence <i>Soterensis</i>, now corrupted to <i>Sodorensis</i>;
and it seems probable that this is the reason why
the Danes called these Islands <i>Sodoroe</i>. The
civil wars that raged among the Scots enabled
the Danes and Norwegians to seize the Isle of
Man; and about the year 1097 or 1098, Donald
Bane, an usurper, who then sat on the throne of
Scotland, treacherously put the Norwegians in
possession of the Western Isles, for the assistance
they had given him. It is probable that these
foreigners were the cause that the see was translated
entirely to the Isle of Man. They were
at length however, expelled from all their usurped
// File: 027.png
.pn +1
dominions. During the great contest between
the houses of Bruce and Baliol for the throne of
Scotland, King Edward <abbr='the third'>III.</abbr>, of England, made
himself master of the Isle of Man, and it has remained
an appendage of the crown of England
ever since. The Lords of the Isle of Man sat up
Bishops of their own, and the Scottish monarchs
continued their Bishops of the Isles. The patronage
of the Bishopric of Man was given, together
with the Island, to the Stanleys, by King
Edward <abbr rend=arabic>IV.</abbr> and they came by an heir-female to
the Duke of Athol, who still keeps it; and on
a vacancy thereof, he nominates the intended
Bishop to the King, who sends him to the Archbishop
of York for consecration. This is the
reason why the Bishop of Sodor and Man is not
a Lord of Parliament, as none can have suffrage
in the house of Peers who do not hold immediately
of the King himself.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art08
THE TABLE.
.sp 2
The form of a half-moon for a table is of very
ancient date; the Romans called it the <i>Sigma</i>,
from its resemblance to the Greek letter so called,
which was in the time of the Roman Emperors
like the letter <abbr rend=spell>C.</abbr> Martial tells us this sort of
table admitted but of seven persons, <i>septem sigma
// File: 028.png
.pn +1
capit</i>. And Lampridius, in his life of Heliogabalus,
mentions it very frequently, and says it was
for seven only; he tells us the Emperor once invited
eight, on purpose to raise a laugh against
the person for whom there would be no seat.
The same form of a table continued in after ages.
The authors of the life of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Martin say, that
the Emperor Maximus invited him to a repast,
where the table had the form of a sigma; and
again in the lower ages, Sidonius Apollinaris
speaks of the same thing in the life of the
Emperor Majorianus; and it is likewise represented
in a manuscript of the fifth or sixth century.
The seat itself was only a common bench
or form; the sigma was the principal piece of
furniture, and most ornamented. In the time of
Homer the guests sat round the table, as we do
now, but afterwards some nations adopted the
custom of a reclining position at their meals.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art09
CLOCKS.
.sp 2
The first Clock we know of in this Country
was put up in an old tower of Westminster Hall,
in the year 1288, and in 1292, there was one
in the Cathedral of Canterbury. These were
probably of foreign workmanship; and it may
be doubted, if there was at that time any person
// File: 029.png
.pn +1
who followed the business of making clocks.
There was, however, one very ingenious artist,
Richard of Wallingford, Abbot of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Albans,
who constructed a clock which represented the
motions of the sun, moon, and stars, and the
ebbing and flowing of the sea. That this wonderful
piece of mechanism might be of permanent
utility to his Abbey, he composed a book of
directions for the management of it. And Leland
who appears to have seen it, says, that in his
opinion all Europe could not produce such
another.

There is a fine specimen of ancient Clock-making
in Wells Cathedral. It is a clock constructed
by Peter Lightfoot, one of the monks of
Glastonbury, about the year 1325, of complicated
design and ingenious execution. It was originally
put up in that celebrated Monastery, and
was placed in the south transept, and by means
of a communication tolled the hours on the great
bell of the central tower, whilst the quarters
were struck by automata on two small bells in
the transept. The dial plate shews the hours,
and also the changes of the moon, the solar and
other astronomical motions; on its summit there
is an horizontal frame work, which exhibits by
the aid of machinery, eight knights on horseback
armed for a tournament, and pursuing each other
with a rapid rotatory motion. At the Reformation
this clock was removed from Glastonbury
// File: 030.png
.pn +1
Abbey to its present situation in Wells Cathedral.

The Clock in Exeter Cathedral was erected
by Bishop Courtenay in the year 1480. It is on
the Ptolemaic system of Astronomy and of a
curious construction for the age in which it was
put up. The earth is represented by a globe in
the centre; the sun by a fleur-de-lys; and the
moon by a ball painted half black and half white,
which turns on its axis, and shews the different
phases of that luminary.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art10
ALDUS MANUTIUS. | [DIED 1516.]
.sp 2
It would be difficult to say whether the exertions
of any individual, however splendid his
talents, or even the labours of any particular
association, or academy, however celebrated,
ever shed so much lustre on the place of their
residence as that which Venice derives from the
reputation of a stranger, who voluntarily selected
it for his abode. I allude to <sc>Aldus Manutius</sc>.
This extraordinary person combined the
lights of the scholar, with the industry of the
mechanic; and to his labours, carried on without
interruption till the conclusion of a long life,
the world owes the first or <i>principes editiones</i> of
// File: 031.png
.pn +1
twenty eight Greek Classics. Among these we
find Pindar, Æschylus, Sophocles, Euripides,
Herodotus, Thucydides, Demosthenes, Plato,
and Aristotle. Besides these, there are few
ancient authors of any note, of whom this indefatigable
editor has not published editions of
acknowledged accuracy, and as far as the means of
the art of printing, then in its infancy, permitted,
of great beauty. In order to appreciate the merit
of Aldus, we must consider the difficulties under
which he must have laboured at a time when
there were few public libraries; when there was
no regular communication between distant cities;
when the price of manuscripts put them out of
the reach of persons of ordinary incomes; and
when the existence of many since discovered,
was utterly unknown. The man who could surmount
these obstacles, and publish so many
authors till then inedited; who could find means
and time to give new and more accurate editions
of so many others already published, and accompany
them all with prefaces mostly of his own
composition; who could extend his attention
still farther and by his labours secure the fame,
by immortalizing the compositions of the most
distinguished scholars of his own age and country,
must have been endowed in a very high degree,
not only with industry and perseverance, but
with judgment, learning, and discrimination.
One virtue more, Aldus possessed in common
// File: 032.png
.pn +1
with many of the great literary characters of
that period, I mean, a sincere and manly piety,
a virtue which gives consistency, vigour, and
permanency to every good quality, and never
fails to communicate a certain grace and dignity
to the whole character.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art11
BOTTLES OF SKIN.
.sp 2
The Ancients made use of bottles of skin to
hold their wine, as is usual in many countries to
this day. Thus Homer mentions wine being
<i>brought in a goat’s skin</i>. (<abbr=Iliad>Il.</abbr> <abbr=two>II.</abbr> <abbr=three>iii.</abbr> line 247.
<abbr=Odyssey>Odys.</abbr> <abbr=six>VI.</abbr> line 78, <abbr=nine>IX.</abbr> line 196, 212) Herodotus
(<abbr=two>ii.</abbr> 121,) mentions <i>skins</i> being filled with wine.
And Maundrell in his Travels to Jerusalem, speaking
of the Greek Convent at Bellmount, near
Tripoli, in Syria, says, “The same person whom
we saw officiating at the altar in his embroidered
sacerdotal robe, brought us the next day on his
own back, a kid, and a <i>goat’s skin of wine</i> as a
present from the Convent.”
// File: 033.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art12
ENGLISH SLAVE TRADE.
.sp 2
A great article of exportation among the
Anglo-Saxons was Slaves, in which kind of
traffic, the Northumbrians in particular, were
very famous, amongst whom this trade continued,
according to William of Malmesbury, for some
time after the conquest. The people of Bristol
were also very much employed in the Slave
Trade, which they pursued with such eagerness,
that they frequently spared not their nearest relations;
but at length they were prevailed upon
by the preaching and exhortation of Wulstan,
Bishop of Worcester, who possessed that See at
the time of the Conquest, to quit such a barbarous
and inhuman traffic.

In the history of the Saxon period there is
frequent mention of living money, in contradistinction
to coins of gold, silver, &c. This living
money consisted of slaves and cattle of all
sorts, which according to the value fixed upon
them by law, were equally current with gold or
silver in the payment of debts.

In Domesday Book it is said that in the
Borough of Lewes, four-pence was to be paid to
the Portreeve for every man sold within that
borough.
// File: 034.png
.pn +1

The Monks were forbid by an ancient Canon
to manumit their slaves, and this unhappy race
of men seems to have been longer perpetuated on
the estates of the Monasteries than elsewhere, for
in the survey of Glastonbury Abbey taken after
the dissolution, there is mention of “271 bondmen,
whose bodies and goods were at the King’s
Highness’s pleasure.”
.sp 4
.h2 id=art13
OLIVER CROMWELL’S WIFE.
.sp 2
The two following notable instances of this
Lady’s niggardliness are taken from a very scarce
little book intitled “The Court and Kitchen of
Elizabeth Cromwell,” &c. printed in 1664.

“The first, was the very next summer after
Oliver’s coming to the Protectorate in 1654. In
June, at the very first season of green pease,
where a poor country woman living some where
about London, having a very early but small
quantity in her garden, was advised to gather them
and carry them to the Lady Protectress; her
counsellors conceiving she would be very liberal
in her reward, they being the first of that year;
accordingly the poor woman came to the <i>Strand</i>;
and having her pease amounting to a peck and a
half, in a basket, a cook by the <i>Savoy</i> as she
// File: 035.png
.pn +1
passed, either seeing or guessing at them, demanded
the price, and upon her silence offered her an
angel (a coin so called) for them, but the woman
expecting some greater matter, went on her way
to <i>Whitehall</i>, where after much ado, she was
directed to her chamber, and one of her maids
came out, and understanding it was a present and
a rarity, carried it in to the Protectress, who out
of her princely munificence sent her a crown,
which the maid told into her hand; the woman
seeing this baseness, and the frustration of her
hopes, and remembering withal what the cook
had proffered her, <i>threw back the money into the
maid’s hands, and desired her to fetch her back
her pease, for that she was offered five shillings
more for them before she brought them thither,
and could go fetch it presently</i>; and so half slightingly
and half ashamedly, this great lady returned
her present, putting it off with a censure upon
the unsatisfactory daintiness of luxurious and
prodigal epicurism. The very same pease were
afterwards sold by the woman to the said cook,
who is yet alive (that is in 1664) to justify the
truth of this relation.

“The other is of a later date. Upon Oliver’s
rupture with the Spaniards, the commodities of
Spain grew very scarce, and the prices of
them raised by such as could procure them under-hand.
Among the rest of these goods, the fruits
of the growth of that country were very rare
// File: 036.png
.pn +1
and dear, especially oranges and lemons. One
day as the Protector was private at dinner he
called for an orange to a loin of veal, to which
he used no other sauce, and urging the same command,
was answered by his wife, that <i>Oranges
were oranges now; that crab oranges would cost
a groat, and for her part she never intended to
give it</i>; and it was presently whispered that sure
her Highness was never the adviser of the Spanish
war: and that his Highness would have done well
to have consulted his digestion, before his lusty
and inordinate appetite of dominion and riches
in the West Indies.”
.sp 4
.h2 id=art14
SHAKESPEARE.
.sp 2
The following ingenious reasons are assigned
by Mr. Charles Butler, in his “Memoirs of the
English Catholics,” as grounds for a belief that
Shakespeare was a Roman Catholic.

“May the Writer premise a suspicion, which
from internal evidence, he has long entertained,
that Shakespeare was a Roman Catholic. Not
one of his works contains the slightest reflections
on Popery, or any of its practices; or any eulogy
of the Reformation. His panegyric on Queen
Elizabeth is cautiously expressed; whilst Queen
Catherine is placed in a state of veneration; and
// File: 037.png
.pn +1
nothing can exceed the skill with which Griffith
draws the panegyric of Wolsey. The Ecclesiastic
is never presented by Shakespeare in a
degrading point of view. The jolly Monk, the
irregular Nun, never appear in his Drama. Is it
not natural to suppose, that the topics, on which
at that time, those who criminated Popery loved
so much to dwell, must have often solicited his
notice, and invited him to employ his muse upon
them, as subjects likely to engage the favourable
attention both of the Sovereign and the subject?
Does not his abstinence from these justify a suspicion,
that <i>a Popish feeling</i> with-held him from
them. Milton made the Gunpowder Conspiracy
the theme of a regular Poem. <i>Shakespeare is
altogether silent on it.</i>”

.tb

The Editor of the Morning Chronicle has
given a short comment on the above Paragraph:
“We will only oppose” says he, “a
single observation to Mr. Butler’s suspicion.
Shakespeare was buried <i>at his own desire in a
Protestant Church</i>, with this rather curious Inscription,
which we recommend to Mr. Butler’s
perusal:

.pm verse-start
<i>Good Friend for Jesu’s sake forbear</i>
To dig the dust inclosed here.
Blest be the man that spares these stones,
And curst be he that moves my bones.”
.pm verse-end
// File: 038.png
.pn +1

The Editor of the Morning Chronicle does
not give his authority for stating that Shakespeare
was buried <i>by his own desire</i> in a Protestant
Church. The poet, in his will, does not express
any <i>desire</i> about being buried in any particular
place, and being buried in a Protestant Church,
neither proves one thing nor another respecting
his religion. It is no proof that he was a Protestant
because he was buried in a Protestant
Church, even if it were clearly shewn that it was
by his own desire; neither is it any proof that
he was not a Roman Catholic because he was
buried in a Protestant Church. Let us ask the
Editor of the <abbr rend=spell>M. C.</abbr> where the Catholics of
Shakespeare’s time could bury their dead but in
Protestant Churches, or in consecrated ground
belonging to Protestant Churches?

The inscription which the Editor of the <abbr rend=spell>M. C.</abbr>
mentions to have been placed upon Shakespeare’s
tomb, certainly does not prove any more respecting
his religion than does his being buried in a
Protestant Church. It has been observed with
a high degree of probability that the inscription
in question alludes to the custom which was then
in use of removing skeletons after a certain time,
and depositing them in Charnel Houses. Similar
execrations are found in many ancient Latin
Epitaphs.

It is one of the observations of Mr. Butler, in
proof of his suspicion, that Shakespeare was a
// File: 039.png
.pn +1
Roman Catholic, that the poet has not eulogized
the Reformation. In the speech (play of Henry
<abbr='the eighth'>VIII.</abbr> scene the last) which Archbishop Cranmer
makes at the christening of the Princess
Elizabeth, Shakespeare puts into the Prelate’s
mouth these prophetic words—

.pm verse-start
“In her days ...

“<sc>God</sc> shall be truly known” ...
.pm verse-end

which appear evidently to infer that in the Roman
Catholic times <sc>God</sc> was not truly known, but
that the Reformation, so eminently promoted by
Queen Elizabeth, had brought forth light and
truth. Mr. Butler seems to have overlooked
these lines, and the inference that may be
drawn from them, namely, that Shakespeare was
<i>not</i> a Roman Catholic.

The author of a Tragedy, recently published,
entitled “Moscow,” says (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 67.) that “he has
discovered that Shakespeare was a Free-Mason.
Let every brother of the <i>third degree</i>, therefore
<sc>SEARCH</sc> the works of the immortal bard, and he
will find the <sc>TRUTH</sc> of the above assertion.”
.sp 4
.h2 id=art15
UNIVERSITY DEGREES.
.sp 2
It does not appear that there were any degrees
in either the Greek or Roman academies; the
only distinction was that of masters and scholars.
// File: 040.png
.pn +1
The first seminaries of learning among christians
were the cathedral churches and monasteries,
but in process of time the schools belonging to
them were regulated, and men of learning
opened others in places where they could find
protection and encouragement. Hence the origin
of universities, which at first were merely a
collection of those schools, to which Princes and
great men gave liberal endowments, and granted
particular immunities and privileges. Degrees
were not conferred till the universities were incorporated;
a circumstance extremely probable,
when we recollect that all civil honours must be
derived from the supreme magistrate.

The most ancient degrees were those of Bachelor
and Master of Arts. Before the existence
of a certain statute, which obliged the theologists
to be regents in arts previously to their ascending
the chair of Doctor, they were only students, and
bachelors, or masters of divinity, without reading
the arts. At that time the degrees in arts were
held in such estimation, as to be thought superior
to that of doctor in any other faculty.

The degree of Doctor was not known in
England till the time of Henry <abbr='the second'>II</abbr>. It afterwards
became common, and was taken not only
by Professors of Divinity, Law, and Medicine,
but by those of Grammar, Music, Philosophy,
Arts, &c. As the Doctors of those professions,
however, seldom obtained great honour or
// File: 041.png
.pn +1
riches, this degree declined and fell into neglect.
That of Music is the only one which has
survived.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art16
GUY CARLETON, | LORD DORCHESTER.
.sp 2
When General Wolfe was appointed to the
Command of the Land Forces destined to act
against Canada, in 1759, Mr. Pitt, then Secretary
of State, told him, that as he could not give
him so many troops as he wanted for the Expedition,
he would make it up to him in the best
manner he could, by allowing him the appointment
of all his Officers. Accordingly the
General sent in a list, in which was the name of
Lieutenant-Colonel Carleton, whom he had put
down as Quarter-Master-General. This Officer,
who had been Aide-de-Camp to the Duke of
Cumberland during the campaign in Germany,
in 1757, had unfortunately made himself obnoxious
to George the Second, by some unguarded
expressions relating to the Hanoverian Troops,
and which had by some officious person been reported
to the King. Lord Ligonier, then Commander
in Chief of the Forces, took General
Wolfe’s list to his Majesty for his approbation,
// File: 042.png
.pn +1
when the King having looked over it, made some
objections in pointed terms, to Colonel Carleton’s
name, and refused to sign his commission.
Lord Ligonier reported the King’s objections
and refusal to Mr. Pitt, who immediately sent his
Lordship a second time to his Majesty with no
better success. Mr. Pitt then suggested that his
Lordship should go again, which he refused,
on which Mr. Pitt told him, that unless he went
to the King and got Colonel Carleton’s commission
signed he should lose his place. Lord
Ligonier then went a third time to the King, and
represented to him the peculiar state of the expedition,
and that in order to make the General
completely responsible for every part of his conduct,
it was necessary that the officers employed
under him should be those who enjoyed his entire
and perfect confidence, so that, if he did not succeed,
he might not accuse the Government at
home with putting under him officers who, either
by incapacity, want of energy, or inactivity,
should thwart his commands, and thus paralyse
the most skilful arrangements. The King listened
to his Lordship’s reasons with a favourable
ear, and his resentment against Colonel Carleton,
was so completely disarmed, that he immediately
signed the commission under which that Officer
accompanied General Wolfe as Quarter-Master-General
of his army.
// File: 043.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art17
FIGS.
.sp 2
Figs have from the earliest times been reckoned
among the delights of the palate.

Moses, in the Pentateuch, enumerates among
the praises of the promised land, (<abbr=Deuteronomy>Deut.</abbr> <abbr=eight>viii.</abbr> 8.)
that it was a “Land of Fig Trees”.

The Athenians valued figs at least as highly as
the Jews. Alexis (in the Deipnosophists) calls
figs “Food for the Gods.” Pausanias says that
the Athenian, Phytalus, was rewarded by Ceres
for his hospitality, with the gift of the first fig-tree.
Some foreign guest, no doubt, transmitted
to him the plant, which he introduced into Attica.
It succeeded so well there, that Athensæus brings
forward Lynceus and Antiphanes vaunting the
figs of Attica as the best on the earth. Horapollo,
or rather his commentator Bolzair, says that
when the master of a house is going a journey he
hangs out a broom of fig-boughs for good luck.

By one of the laws of Solon all the products
of the earth were forbidden to be exported from
Athens; under this law the exportation of figs
was prohibited, and it is from this circumstance
we have the word <i>sycophant</i> from the Greek;
those who violated this law were subject to a
heavy penalty, and the informer against the
// File: 044.png
.pn +1
delinquents was called a sycophant from the original
word literally meaning an “exhibiter of
figs,” as thereby substantiating his charge. The
name was afterward more extensively applied,
and is now associated with the ideas of meanness,
servility, and calumny.

A taste for figs marked the progress of refinement
in the Roman Empire. In Cato’s time
but six sorts of figs were known; in Pliny’s
twenty-nine. The sexual system of plants seems
first to have been observed in the fig tree. Pliny
in his Natural History alludes to this under the
term <i>caprification</i>.

In modern times the esteem for figs has been
more widely diffused; when Charles the <abbr=fifth>5th</abbr>
visited Holland in 1540, a Dutch merchant sent
him, as the greatest delicacy which Zuricksee
could offer, a plate of figs. The gracious Emperor
dispelled for a moment the fogs of the climate
by declaring, that he had never eaten figs in Spain
with more pleasure. Carter praises the figs of
Malaga; Tournefort those of Marseilles; Ray
those of Italy; Brydone those of Sicily; Dumont
those of Malta; Browne those of Thessaly;
Pocock those of Mycone; De la Mourtraye
those of Tenedos and Mitylene; Chandler those of
Smyrna; Maillet those of Cairo; and Lady Mary
Wortley Montague those of Tunis. What less
can be inferred from this conspiring testimony
than that wherever there is a fig there is a feast?
// File: 045.png
.pn +1

It remains for Jamaica, and the contiguous
Islands, to acquire that celebrity for the growth
of figs, which yet attaches to the Eastern Archipelago;
to learn to dry them as in the Levant,
and to supply the desserts of the English tables.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art18
FRUITS, | CULTIVATED AT ROME IN THE TIME OF PLINY, THAT ARE NOW GROWN IN OUR ENGLISH GARDENS.
.sp 2
<sc>Apples.</sc>—The Romans had twenty-two
sorts of Apples. Sweet Apples (<i>melimala</i>) for
eating, and others for cookery. They had one
sort without kernels.

\[Eugene Aram, in his collections for a dictionary
of the Celtic language, says that the name of
the Apple Tree is a corruption of “Apollo’s
Tree.”—“And that this is its original, will be
easily deducible from a little reflection on the
proofs in support of it. The prizes in the sacred
games were the Olive Crown, Apples, Parsleys
and the Pine. Lucian, in his Book of Games,
affirms that Apples were the reward in the Sacred
Games of Apollo; and Curtius asserts the same
thing. It appears also that the Apple Tree was
consecrated to Apollo before the Laurel; for
both Pindar and Callimachus observe that Apollo
// File: 046.png
.pn +1
did not put on the Laurel until after his conquest
of the Python, and that he appropriated it to
himself on account of his passion for Daphne, to
whom the laurel was sacred. The Victor’s wreath
at first was a bough with its apples hanging upon
it, sometimes with a branch of laurel; and antiquity
united these together as the reward of the
Victor in the Pythian games.”]

<sc>Apricots.</sc>—Pliny says of the Apricot
(Armeniaca) <i>quæ sola et odore commendantur</i>.
He arranges them among his plums.—Martial
valued them but little, as appears by his epigram,
<abbr=thirteen>xiii.</abbr> 46.

\[The Apricot, we are told came originally from
Armenia, whence its name <i>Armeniaca</i>. Wolfe,
gardener to King Henry the <abbr=eighth>8th</abbr>, first introduced
Apricots into England. Tusser mentions the
Apricot in his list of fruits cultivated here in
1573.]

<sc>Almonds</sc>—were abundant, both bitter and
sweet. \[The Almond was introduced into England
in 1570; it is not, however, in Tusser’s list
of fruits cultivated here in 1573.]

<sc>Cherries</sc>—were introduced into Rome in
the year of the city 680, <abbr rend=spell>B. C.</abbr> 73, and were
carried thence to Britain 120 years after, <abbr rend=spell>A. D.</abbr>
48. The Romans had eight kinds, a red one, a
black one, a kind so tender as scarce to bear any
carriage, a hard fleshed one (<i>duracina</i>) like our
bigarreau, a small one with a bitterish flavour
// File: 047.png
.pn +1
(<i>laurea</i>) like our little wild black, also a dwarf
one, the tree bearing which did not exceed three
feet in height.

\[Cherries are said to have come originally from
Cerasus, a city of Pontus, from which Lucullus
brought them into Italy, after the Mithridatic
War. They so generally pleased at Rome, and
were so easily propagated in all climates into
which the Romans extended their arms, that
within the space of a hundred years, they had
become common. It has been erroneously supposed
that Cherries were first introduced into
this country by Richard Haynes, fruiterer to King
Henry the eighth, who planted them at Teynham,
in Kent, whence they had the name of Kentish
cherries; but Lydgate who wrote his poem
called “Lickpenny” before the middle of the
fifteenth century, or probably before the year
1415, mentions them in the following lines, as
being commonly sold at that time by the hawkers
in the streets of London:

.pm verse-start
“Hot pescode oon began to cry,
”Straberys rype, and cherreys in the ryse.”
.pm verse-end

Ryce, rice, or ris, properly means a long-branch;
and the word is still used in that sense
in the West of England.

Dr. Bulleyn shews there were plenty of good
native cherries at Ketteringham, near Norwich;
pears, called the Blackfriars, in and about that
// File: 048.png
.pn +1
city; and excellent grapes at Blaxhall in Suffolk,
where he was rector from 1550 to 1554.]

<sc>Chesnuts.</sc>—The Romans had six sorts, some
more easily separated from the skin than others,
and one with a red skin. They roasted them
as we do.

\[The chesnut, <i>castanea</i>, is a native of the South
of Europe, and is said to take its name from
Castanea, a city of Thessaly, where anciently it
grew in great plenty. Gerard says that in his
time there were several woods of chesnuts in
England, particularly one near Feversham, in
Kent; and Fitz-Stephen, in a description of
London, written by him in Henry the second’s
time, speaks of a very noble forest which grew
on the north side of it. This tree grows sometimes
to an amazing size. There is one at Lord
Ducie’s at Tortworth, in the county of Gloucester,
which measures 19 yards in circumference, and
is mentioned by Sir Robert Atkyns, in his History
of that County, as a famous tree in King
John’s time; and by Mr. Evelyn in his Sylva,
to have been so remarkable for its magnitude
in the reign of King Stephen, as then to be
called the great chesnut of Tortworth; from
which it may be reasonably supposed to have
been standing before the conquest. Lord Ducie
had a drawing of it taken and engraved in 1772.
Formerly a great part of London was built with
chesnut and walnut timber.]
// File: 049.png
.pn +1

The Horse Chesnut was brought from the
northern parts of Asia into Europe, about the
year 1550, and was sent to Vienna, about the
year 1558. From Vienna it migrated into Italy
and France: but it comes to us from the Levant
immediately. Gerard in his Herbal, printed in
1597, speaks of it only as a foreign Tree. In
Johnson’s edition of the same Work printed in
1633, it is said, “Horse Chesnut groweth in
Italy, and in sundry places of the East Country;
it is now growing with Mr. Tradescant at South
Lambeth.” Parkinson says “our Christian
World had first the knowledge of it from Constantinople.”—The
same Author places the
Horse Chesnut in his Orchard, as a fruit tree
between the Walnut and the Mulberry. How
little it was then known, 1629, may be inferred
from his saying not only that it is of a greater and
more pleasant aspect, for the fair leaves, but also
of a good use for the fruit, which is of a sweet
taste, roasted and eaten as the ordinary sort.—This
tree does not seem to have been so common
a hundred years ago as it is now. Mr. Houghton
(1700) mentions some at Sir William
Ashhurst’s at Highgate, and especially at the
Bishop of London’s at Fulham. Those now
standing at Chelsea College were then very
young. There was also a very fine one in the
Pest-house garden near Old-Street, and another
not far from the Ice-house under the shadow of
the Observatory in Greenwich Park.
// File: 050.png
.pn +1

<sc>Figs.</sc>—The Romans had many sorts of figs,
black and white, large and small; one as large
as a pear, another no larger than an olive.

\[The fig has been cultivated in England ever
since 1562. It is omitted by Tusser in his list of
fruits cultivated in our gardens. Cardinal Pole
is said to have imported from Italy that tree,
which is still growing in the garden of the Archbishop’s
palace at Lambeth. It is the oldest fig
tree that is known in this kingdom. In the Percy
Household-book, the person who had the charge
of providing for the consumption and use of the
Earl of Northumberland’s numerous family, was
ordered to purchase four coppets of figs, for which
he was to pay twenty pence for each coppet.
This quantity was to serve for one year.]

<sc>Medlars.</sc>—The Romans had two kinds of
medlars, the one larger, and the other smaller.

<sc>Mulberries.</sc>—The Romans had two kinds
of the black sort, a larger and a smaller. Pliny
speaks also of a mulberry growing on a briar:
<i>Nascuntur et in rubis</i>, (1. <abbr=fifteen>xv.</abbr> <abbr=section>sect.</abbr> 27) but whether
this means the raspberry, or the common
blackberry, does not appear.

\[The mulberry, <i>Morus</i>, is a native of Persia,
whence it was introduced into the southern parts
of Europe, and is commonly cultivated in England,
Germany, and other countries where the winters
are not very severe. “We are informed,” says
Forsyth in his treatise on fruit trees, “that mulberries
were first introduced into this country in
// File: 051.png
.pn +1
1596; but I have reason to believe that they
were brought hither previous to that period, as
many old trees are to be seen standing at this day
about the sites of ancient abbeys and monasteries,
from which it is at least probable that they
had been introduced before the dissolution of
religious houses. Four large mulberry trees are
still standing on the site of an old kitchen garden,
now part of the pleasure-ground, at Sion House,
which, perhaps may have stood there ever since
that house was a monastery. The first Duke of
Northumberland has been heard to say, that these
trees were above 300 years old. At the Priory
near Stanmore, Middlesex, (the seat of the Marquis
of Abercorn) there are also some ancient
Mulberry trees. The Priory was formerly a
religious house.”

Gerard in his description of the mulberry tree
has the following curious paragraph: “Hexander
in Athenæus affirmeth, that the mulberry trees
in his time did not bring forth fruit in twenty
years together; and that so great a plague of the
gout reigned and raged so generally, as not only
men, but boys, and women were troubled with
that disease.”

Tusser, in his list of fruits cultivated in England
in 1573 enumerates the Mulberry.—Gerard,
who published his history of plants in 1597,
says in that book, that Mulberry Trees then
grew in sundry gardens in England.]
// File: 052.png
.pn +1

<sc>Nuts.</sc>—The Romans had Hazel Nuts and
Filberds. They roasted these Nuts.

<sc>Pears.</sc>—Of these the Romans had many
sorts, both Summer and Winter Fruit, melting
and hard; they had more than thirty six kinds,
some were called <i>Libralia</i>. We have our Pound
Pear.

\[Pliny mentions twenty kinds of this fruit, and
Virgil five or six.

Ælian describing the most ancient food of
several nations, reports that at Argos they fed
chiefly upon Pears.

Tusser, states that “Pears of all sorts” were
cultivated here in his time.

The Arms of Wardon Abbey, in Bedfordshire,
as given by Tanner, are Argent, Three Pears,
Or.—Quere, if these are the species called
Wardons, or if they are peculiar to that part of
England.

The Wardon Pear is common in Yorkshire.]

<sc>Plums.</sc>—The Romans had a multiplicity of
sorts (<i>ingens turba prunorum</i>) black, white, and
variegated; one sort was called <i>asinia</i>, from its
cheapness; another <i>damascena</i>; this had much
stone and little flesh: from Martial’s Epigram,
<abbr=thirteen>xiii.</abbr> 29, we may conclude that it was what we
now call prunes.

[The Plum is generally supposed to be a native
of Asia, and the Damascene (Damson) to take
its name from Damascus, a city of Syria.
// File: 053.png
.pn +1

Tusser enumerates in his list of fruits “Grene
or Grass Plums, and Peer Plums, black and
yellow.”

Lord Cromwell introduced the Perdrigon
Plum in the Reign of Henry the seventh.]

<sc>Quinces.</sc>—The Romans had three sorts, one
was called <i>Chrysomela</i>, from its yellow flesh.
They boiled them with honey as we make marmalade.
See Martial, <abbr=thirteen>xiii.</abbr> 24.

[The Quince is called Cydonia, from Cydon, a
town of Crete, famous for this fruit.—Tusser
mentions it among his fruit-trees, and Gerard
says it was cultivated here in his time.]

<sc>Services.</sc>—They had the Apple-shaped,
the Pear-shaped, and a small kind, probably the
same that we gather wild, the Azarole.

[There are three sorts of the Service Tree cultivated
in England, namely the cultivated Service;
the Wild Service or Mountain Ash; and
the Maple leaved Service. The first is a native
of the warmer climes of Europe; and the other
two grow wild in different parts of England.]

<sc>Strawberries.</sc>—The Romans had Strawberries,
but do not appear to have prized them.
The climate is too warm to produce this fruit in
perfection unless in the hills.

[Tusser enumerates Strawberries, red and
white, as being cultivated when he wrote.]

<sc>Vines.</sc>—The Romans had a multiplicity of
Vines, both thick-skinned, (<i>duracina</i>,) and thin-skinned:
// File: 054.png
.pn +1
one Vine growing at Rome produced
12 Amphoræ of juice, equal to 84 gallons. They
had round-berried, and long-berried sorts, one
so long that it was called <i>dactilydes</i>, the grapes
being like the fingers on the hand. Martial
(<abbr=thirteen>xiii.</abbr> 22.) speaks favourably of the hard-skinned
grape for eating.

\[In Domesday Book, (1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 8. <abbr=column>col</abbr> 1.) there are
said to be in the Bishop of Bayeux’s Manor of
<i>Chert</i>, in the county of Kent, three arpents of
<i>Vineyard</i>, and in the Manor of Leeds (1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 7.
<abbr=column>col.</abbr> 4.) belonging to the same Bishop, two Arpents
of <i>Vineyard</i>.

In several Charters in the “Registrum Roffensis”
mention is made of <i>the Vineyard</i> belonging
to the Monks of Rochester, wherein grew great
quantities of grapes; and which is also, in much
later days, said by Worlidge, to have produced
excellent wines. Bishop Hamon presented some
of the wine and grapes of his own growth, at
Halling, near Rochester, to Edward the second,
when at Bockinfold; and in some old leases of
the bishoprick, mention has been found made, of
considerable quantities of <i>Blackberries</i> being
delivered to the Bishop of Rochester, by sundry
of his Tenants, for the purpose of <i>colouring the
wine</i> growing in his Vineyard. This gives us
some idea of what sort the wine was, and also
deserves well to be compared with that ancient
usage of making wines in this country, the
// File: 055.png
.pn +1
remembrance whereof is preserved by means of
some records of the reign of Henry the third;
amongst which are two precepts, the one (Claus.
An. 34. <abbr=Henry>Hen.</abbr> <abbr=three>III.</abbr>) to the keepers of the king’s
wines at York, to deliver out to one Robert (de
Monte Pessulano) such wines, and as much as he
pleased to make <i>for the king’s use, against the feast
of Christmas, (Claret) such drink, as he used to
make in preceding years</i>. The first record says,
<i>ad potus regis pretiosos delicatos inde faciendos</i>.
The second says, <i>ad Claretum inde faciend.—Ad
opus regis sicut annis preteritis facere consuevit.</i>
And both may be seen at length in Walpole’s
Anecdotes of Painting, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> i. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 11. Perhaps it
may not be undeserving notice, that even to the
beginning of the eighteenth Century, almost all
red wine was, in this country, called Claret.

Honey and Mead, constituted a part of the
mixture of the royal Norman Claret, and for
several ages Claret was considered as belonging
to the Materia Medica; and formed a part of the
old English Apothecaries store of Medicines,
preserved in white glazed earthern pitchers, with
labelled inscriptions burnt in large blue letters in
the ware; several of which are still preserved.

Several other Monasteries and Abbeys, had
remarkable Vineyards, as well as Rochester;
particularly that of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Edmund’s Bury; that at
Ely; that at Peterborough; and even that at
Darley Abbey, in Derbyshire; And indeed most
// File: 056.png
.pn +1
of the original Vineyards mentioned are found to
have belonged to Abbeys. It is a curious circumstance,
and elucidating the <i>prices</i> of the age,
that in the time of Henry the third, a <i>Dolium</i>.
or cask of the best wine, sold for forty shillings,
and sometimes even for twenty.

For an enlarged account of Vineyards in England
see Archæologia, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> <abbr=one>i.</abbr> <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 821.; and <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> <abbr=three>iii.</abbr>
<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 53. and 67.]

<sc>Walnuts.</sc>—The Romans had soft shelled,
and hard shelled, as we have. In the golden age,
when men lived upon acorns, the gods lived
upon Walnuts, hence the name <i>Juglans</i>, that is
<i>Jovis glans</i>.[#]

.tb

As a matter of curiosity, it has been deemed
expedient, to add a list of the fruits cultivated in
our English Gardens in the year 1573. This list
is taken from Tusser’s <i>Five hundred points of good
Husbandry</i>.

Thomas Tusser, who had received a liberal
education at Eton school, and at Trinity hall,
Cambridge, lived many years as a farmer in
Suffolk and Norfolk. He afterwards removed
to London, where he published in 1557, the first
// File: 057.png
.pn +1
edition of his work, under the title of “One hundred
points of good husbandry.”

In his fourth edition, from which this list is
taken, he first introduced the subject of Gardening,
and has given us not only a list of the fruits,
but also of all the plants then cultivated in our
gardens, either for pleasure or profit, under the
following heads:—

“Seedes and herbes for the kychen, herbes and
roots for sallets and sauce, herbes and rootes to
boyle or to butter, strewing herbes of all sorts,
herbes, branches, and flowers for windowes and
pots, herbs to still in summer, necessarie herbes
to grow in the gardens for physick not reherst
before.”

This list consists of more than 150 species
besides the following fruits:—

Apple Trees of all sorts—Apricots

Barberries—Bullass, black and white

Cherries, red and black—Chesnuts—Cornet
Plums[#]

Damsons, white and black

Filberds, red and white

Gooseberries—Grapes, white and red—Green
or Grass Plums.

Hurtle Berries.[#]
// File: 058.png
.pn +1

Medlars or Merles—Mulberries.

Peaches, white and red[#]—Pears of all sorts.
Pear Plums, black and yellow.

Quince Trees.

Rasps—Raisins.[#]

Small Nuts—Strawberries, red and white—Service
Trees.

Wardons, white and red—Walnuts—Wheat
Plums.

.fn #
This article is taken from the first volume of the Transactions
of the Horticultural Society, and was communicated
by the Right <abbr=honourable>Hon.</abbr> Sir Joseph Banks, Bart.—The additions,
within brackets, are by the Editor.
.fn-
.fn #
Probably the fruit of <i>Cornus Mascula</i>, commonly called
Cornelian Cherry.
.fn-
.fn #
<i>Hurtleberries</i>, the fruit of <i>Vaccinium vitis idea</i>, though
no longer cultivated in our gardens, are still esteemed and
served up at the tables of opulent people in the counties that
produce them naturally. They are every year brought to
London from the rocky country, near Leath Tower in
Surrey, where they meet with so ready a sale among the
middle classes of the people, that the richer classes scarcely
know that they are to be bought.—They also grow very
plentifully on some of the hills and heaths in the counties of
Somerset and Devon.
.fn-
.fn #
The <i>Yellow fleshed Peach</i>, now uncommon in our
gardens, but which was frequent 40 years ago, under the
name of the Orange Peach, was called by our ancestors
<i>Melicoton</i>.
.fn-
.fn #
By <i>Raisins</i> it is probable that Currants are meant; the
imported fruit of that name of which we make puddings and
pies was called by our ancestors <i>Raisin de Corance</i>.—In the
Percy Household Book it is said that 200 pounds <i>of Raisins
de Corance</i> should be purchased for the use of the Earl of
Northumberland’s family, which were to serve one year.
.fn-
// File: 059.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art19
PEACOCKS.
.sp 2
India, says Mr. Pennant, gave us Peacocks,
and we are assured by Knox, in his History of
Ceylon, that they are still found in the wild state,
in vast flocks, in that island and in Java. So
beautiful a bird could not be permitted to be a
stranger in the more distant parts; for so early
as the days of Solomon (1 Kings, <abbr=ten>x.</abbr> 22.) we
find among the articles imported in his Tarshish
navies, Apes and Peacocks. A monarch so conversant
in all branches of natural history, would
certainly not neglect furnishing his officers with
instructions for collecting every curiosity in the
country to which they made voyages, which
gave him a knowledge that distinguished him
from all the princes of his time. Ælian relates
that they were brought into Greece from some
barbarous country, and that they were held in
such high estimation, that a male and female
were valued at Athens at 1000 <i>drachmæ</i>, or £32.
5<i>s.</i> 10<i>d.</i> Their next step might be to Samos;
where they were preserved about the temple of
Juno, being the birds sacred to that goddess; and
Gellius in his <i>Noctes Allicæ</i> commends the excellency
of the Samian Peacocks. It is therefore
probable that they were brought there originally
for the purposes of superstition, and afterwards
// File: 060.png
.pn +1
cultivated for the uses of luxury. We are also
told, when Alexander was in India, he found
vast numbers of wild ones on the banks of the
Hyarotis, and was so struck with their beauty,
as to appoint a severe punishment on any person
that killed them.

Peacocks’ crests, in ancient times were among
the ornaments of the kings of England. Ernald
de Aclent (Acland) paid a fine to king John
in a hundred and forty palfries, with sackbuts,
<i>lorains</i>, gilt spurs and peacock’s crests, such as
would be for his credit.—Some of our regiments
of cavalry bear on their helmets, at present, the
figure of a peacock.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art20
ANCIENT LIBRARIES.
.sp 2
Many events have contributed to deprive us
of a great part of the literary treasures of antiquity.
A very fatal blow was given to literature
by the destruction of the Phœnician temples and
the Egyptian colleges, when those kingdoms and
the countries adjacent, were conquered by the
Persians, about 350 years before Christ. The
Persians had a great dislike to the religion of
the Phœnicians and the Egyptians, and this was
one reason for destroying their books, of which
Eusebius says they had a great number.
// File: 061.png
.pn +1

The first celebrated library of antiquity
was at Alexandria, and called from thence the
Alexandrian library; it owed its foundation to
Ptolemy Soter, king of Egypt, though his Son
Ptolemy Philadelphus enjoys the reputation of
being its founder. This was about 284 years
before the Christian æra.

The palace of Ptolemy Philadelphus was the
asylum of learned men whom he admired and
patronized. He paid particular attention to
Euclid, Theocritus, Callimachus, and Lycophron,
and by increasing the library, of which his father
had laid the foundation, he shewed his taste for
learning and wish to encourage genius. This
celebrated library at his death contained 200,000
volumes of the best and choicest books, and it
was afterwards increased to 700,000 volumes.
The method adopted for making this collection
was the seizing of all the books that were
brought by the Greeks or other foreigners into
Egypt, and sending them to Ptolemy, who
had them transcribed by persons employed for
that purpose. The transcripts were then delivered
to the proprietors, and the originals laid
up in the library. Ptolemy Euergetes, for
instance, borrowed of the Athenians the works
of Sophocles, Euripides, and Æschylus, and only
returned them the copies, which he caused to be
transcribed in as beautiful a manner as possible;
the originals he retained for his own library,
// File: 062.png
.pn +1
presenting the Athenians with fifteen talents for
the exchange, that is, with upwards of £3,000
sterling. As the Alexandrian academy was at
first in the quarter of the city called <i>Bruchion</i>,
the library was placed there, but when the
number of books amounted to 400,000 volumes,
another library within the <i>Serapeum</i> was erected,
by way of supplement to it, and on that account
called the daughter of the former. The books
lodged in the Serapeum increased to the number
of 300,000, and these two made up the number
of 700,000 volumes, of which the royal libraries
of the Ptolemys were said to consist.

In the war which Julius Cæsar waged with
the inhabitants of Alexandria, the library of
Bruchion was accidentally, but unfortunately,
burned; but the library in the Serapeum still
remained. The whole was magnificently repaired
by Cleopatra, who deposited there the 200,000
volumes, forming the library of the kings of
Pergamus, with which she had been presented
by Antony. These, and others added to them
from time to time, rendered the new library of
Alexandria more numerous and considerable than
the former, and though it was plundered more
than once during the revolutions which happened
in the Roman empire, yet it was as frequently
supplied with the same number of books, and
continued for many ages to be of great fame and
// File: 063.png
.pn +1
use, until it was burnt by the Saracens, in the
year 642 of the Christian æra.

There was a building adjoining to this
library, called the Museum, for the accommodation
of a college or society of learned men, who
were supported there at the public expense, and
where there were covered walks and seats where
they might carry on disputations.

The next library of antiquity was that founded
at Pergamus, by Eumenes, and considerably increased
by the literary taste of his wealthy and
learned successors, at whose court merit and
virtue were always sure of finding an honorable
patronage. This library which consisted of
200,000 volumes, was given by Antony to
Cleopatra, as has been already mentioned.—Parchment
was first invented and made use of
at Pergamus to transcribe books upon, as
Ptolemy had forbidden the exportation of Papyrus
from Egypt, in order to prevent Eumenes
from making a library as valuable and choice
as that of Alexandria.

The first public library at Rome, and in the
world, as Pliny observes, was erected by Asinius
Pollio, in the Atrium of the Temple of Liberty
on Mount Aventine. Augustus founded a
Greek and Latin library in the Temple of
Apollo on the Palatine Hill, and another in the
name of his sister Octavia, adjoining to the
Theatre of Marcellus.
// File: 064.png
.pn +1

Among the ancient libraries that of Lucullus
is mentioned by Plutarch in terms of the highest
praise. The number of volumes was immense,
and they were written in elegant hands. The
use he made of them was still more honorable
to him than the possession of so much literary
treasure. The library of Lucullus was open to
all; the Greeks who were at Rome repaired
with pleasure to his galleries and porticos, as to
the retreat of the muses, and there spent whole
days in conversation upon subjects of literature,
delighted to retire to such a scene from other
pursuits. Lucullus himself, who was a perfect
master of the Greek language often joined and
conferred with these learned men in their walks.

There were several other libraries at Rome,
the chief of which was the Ulpian library, instituted
by Trajan, which Dioclesian annexed as an
ornament to his baths. One of the most elegant
was that of Serenus Samonicus, preceptor of
the Emperor Gordian. It is said to have contained
not less than 60,000 volumes, and that the
room in which they were deposited was paved
with gilded marble. The walls were ornamented
with glass and ivory; and the shelves, cases,
presses, and desks, made of ebony and silver.
There were libraries in the capital, in the
Temple of Peace, and in the house of Tiberius.
Many private persons had good libraries particularly
in their country villas. The Roman
// File: 065.png
.pn +1
libraries were in general adorned with statues
and pictures, particularly of ingenious and
learned men.

Learning and the arts received a fatal blow by
the destruction of the heathen temples, in the
reign of Constantine. The devastations then
committed, are depicted in the strongest and
most lively colours by Mr. Gibbon, in his History
of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.

Many valuable libraries perished by the Barbarians
of the north, who invaded Italy in the
fourth and fifth centuries. By these rude hands
perished the library of Perseus, king of Macedon,
which Paulus Æmilius brought to Rome with
its captive owner; as did also that noble library,
just mentioned, established for the use of the
public by Asinius Pollio, which was collected
from the spoils of all the enemies he had subdued,
and was much enriched by him at a great expense.
The libraries of Cicero and Lucullus
met with the same fate, and those of Julius
Cæsar, of Augustus, Vespasian, and Trajan also
perished, together with that of the Emperor
Gordian.
// File: 066.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art21
KING CHARLES THE FIRST.
.sp 2
The Journey of Prince Charles (afterwards
Charles the First) and the Duke of Buckingham
to Spain, was considered at the time to be such a
piece of knight-errantry as scarcely any age
could parallel. Spanheim in his history of
Louisa-Juliana, Electress Palatine, mother of
the king of Bohemia, says “that never Prince
was more obliged to a sister, than king Charles <abbr=one>I.</abbr>
was to the queen of Bohemia; since it was only
the consideration of <i>her</i> and <i>her children</i>, who
were then the <i>next heirs</i> after <i>him</i> to the Crown
of England, that prevailed with the Court of
Spain <i>to permit him ever to see England again</i>.”

Charles the First, though of abstemious habits
kept a splendid and hospitable table, at the
beginning of his reign. Of this trait in his character,
hitherto unnoticed, the following account
affords a sufficient proof.

There were daily in his court eighty six tables,
well furnished each meal, whereof the king’s table
had twenty-eight dishes; the queen’s twenty-four;
four other tables sixteen dishes each;
three other ten dishes each; twelve other had
seven dishes each; seventeen other tables had
each of them five dishes; three other had four
each; thirty-two other tables had each three
// File: 067.png
.pn +1
dishes; and thirteen other had each two dishes;
in all about five hundred dishes each meal, with
bread, beer, wine, and all other things necessary.
All which was provided, mostly by the several
purveyors, who, by commission, legally and regularly
authorized, did receive those provisions
at a moderate price, such as had been formerly
agreed upon in the several counties of England,
which price, (by reason of the value of money
much altered) was become low, yet a very inconsiderable
burthen to the kingdom in general,
but thereby was greatly supported the royal
dignity in the eyes of strangers as well as subjects.

The English nobility and gentry, according to
the king’s example, were excited to keep a proportionable
hospitality in their several country
mansions, the husbandmen encouraged to breed
cattle, all tradesmen to a cheerful industry; and
there was then a free circulation of money throughout
the whole body of the kingdom. There was
spent yearly in the king’s house of gross meat
fifteen hundred oxen, seven thousand sheep, twelve
hundred veals, three hundred porkers, four hundred
storks or young beefs, six thousand eight
hundred lambs, three hundred flitches of bacon,
and twenty-six hams; also one hundred and
forty dozen of geese, two hundred and fifty dozen
of capons, four hundred and seventy dozen of
hens, seven hundred and fifty dozen of pullets,
one thousand four hundred and seventy dozen of
// File: 068.png
.pn +1
chickens; for bread three thousand six hundred
bushels of wheat: and for drink six hundred
tuns of wine, and one thousand seven hundred
tuns of beer; moreover of butter forty six thousand
six hundred and forty pounds, together
with fish and fowl, venison, fruit and spice proportionably.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art22
THE FAIR GERALDINE AND THE EARL OF SURREY.
.sp 2
The “Fair Geraldine” the general object of
Lord Surrey’s empassioned sonnets, is commonly
said to have lived at Florence, and to have been
of the family of the <i>Geraldi</i>, of that city. This
is however, a misapprehension of an expression
in one of our poet’s Odes, and of a passage in
Drayton’s Heroic Epistles. This lady was Elizabeth,
third daughter of Gerald Fitzgerald, ninth
Earl of Kildare. She appears to have received
her education at Hunsdon House, with the
Princesses Mary and Elizabeth. It was here she
was first seen by the Earl of Surrey, and she
immediately became the object of his fervent but
fruitless devotion. She was married first to Sir
Anthony Browne, Lord Chief Justice of the Common
Pleas, and secondly to Edward Clinton, Earl
of Lincoln, surviving by many years her noble and
// File: 069.png
.pn +1
unfortunate admirer. There is a Portrait of the
“Fair Geraldine” in the Woburn collection.

It is not precisely known at what period the
Earl of Surrey began his travels. They have
the air of a romance. He made the tour of
Europe in the true spirit of chivalry, and with
the ideas of an Amadis; he proclaimed the unparalleled
charms of his Mistress, and prepared to
defend the cause of her beauty with the weapons
of Knight-errantry; nor was this adventurous
journey performed without the intervention of an
enchanter. The first city in Italy which he proposed
to visit was Florence, the capital of Tuscany,
and the original seat of the ancestors of his
Geraldine.

In his way thither he passed a few days at the
Emperor’s court; where he became acquainted
with Cornelius Agrippa, a celebrated adept
in natural magic. This visionary Philosopher
shewed our hero in a mirror of glass, a representation
of Geraldine, reclining on a couch, sick,
and reading one of his most tender sonnets by a
waxen taper. His imagination, which wanted
not the flattering representations and artificial
incentives of illusion, was heated anew by this
interesting and affecting spectacle. Inflamed
with every enthusiasm of the most romantic passion,
he hastened to Florence; and on his arrival,
immediately published a defiance against any
person who could handle a lance and was in love,
// File: 070.png
.pn +1
whether Christian, Jew, Turk, Saracen, or Cannibal,
who should presume to dispute the superiority
of Geraldine’s beauty. As the lady was pretended
to be of Tuscan extraction, the pride of
the Florentines was flattered on this occasion;
and the Grand Duke of Tuscany permitted a
general and unmolested ingress into his dominions
of the combatants of all countries, until this important
trial should be decided. The challenge
was accepted, and the Earl proved victorious.
The shield which was presented to him by the
Duke of Tuscany before the tournament began,
is exhibited in Vertue’s valuable print of the
Arundel family, and was actually in the possession
of one of the late Dukes of Norfolk.

These heroic vanities did not, however, so
totally engross the time which the Earl of Surrey
spent in Italy, as to alienate his mind from
letters; he studied with the greatest success a
critical knowledge of the Italian tongue; and
that he might give new lustre to the name of
Geraldine, attained a just taste for the peculiar
graces of the Italian poetry.

He was recalled to England for some idle
reason by the king, much sooner than he expected;
and he returned home the most elegant
traveller, the most polite lover, the most learned
nobleman, and the most accomplished gentleman
of his age. Dexterity in tilting and gracefulness
in managing a horse under arms, were
// File: 071.png
.pn +1
excellencies now viewed with a critical eye, and
practised with a high degree of emulation. In
1540 at a tournament held in the presence of
the Court at Westminster, and in which some of
the principal nobility were engaged, Surrey was
distinguished above the rest for his address in the
use and exercise of arms.

But all these accomplishments, and the popularity
that attended them, laid the foundation of
a fatal death for this illustrious nobleman. They
excited the jealousy of his capricious monarch
Henry <abbr='the eighth'>VIII</abbr>. Lord Orford says “The unwieldy
king growing distempered and froward, and apprehensive
for the tranquillity of his boy-successor,
easily conceived or admitted jealousies
infused into him by the Earl of Hertford and the
Protestant party, though one of the last acts of
his fickle life was to found a convent.” Treason
was therefore objected to the Earl of Surrey
upon the most frivolous pretences; of which the
principal was, his quartering the arms of Edward
the Confessor with those of Howard, though even
this insignificant fact had been justified by the
practice of his family, and the sanction of the
heralds. He was arraigned in the Guildhall,
London, found guilty by a jury, and judgment
of death being given, he was beheaded on
Tower Hill, in January, 1547.

The Earl of Surrey was professedly a man of
gallantry and pleasure, possessing a highly
// File: 072.png
.pn +1
cultivated mind, and excelling in all the polite and
elegant accomplishments of the age in which he
lived. The flattery which has been bestowed
upon his character by Poets, Heralds, and Genealogists,
has not ceased to flow from his death to
the present hour. A recent genealogical writer
has been superlatively lavish of his panegyrics
upon the excellencies and even upon the morals
of the gallant Earl. There is, however, one
extraordinary circumstance in the life of this
nobleman which has been entirely overlooked by
all his encomiasts. This is, that while his father
urged him to connect himself in marriage with
one lady; while the king was jealous of his
designs upon a second; and while he himself as
may be collected from his poem “To a Lady
who refused to dance with him,” made proposals
of marriage to a third, he was during all this time
married to the lady Frances,[#] daughter of John
de Vere, Earl of Oxford, by whom he had five
children, namely, two sons and three daughters.
The sons were Thomas, afterwards fourth Duke
of Norfolk, and Henry, created Earl of Northampton,
by king James the First. To this lady
the Earl of Surrey was united at the age of
fifteen, and several years after his premature
death, we find her bearing the title of Countess of
// File: 073.png
.pn +1
Surrey, and possessing the guardianship of his
children, therefore it is apparent they were never
divorced. Can it be supposed that the example
of a lustful king had instructed his courtiers,
among their other accomplishments, to find pretexts
for the dissolution of the marriage tie, whenever
interest or their guilty passions prompted
them to such baseness? Yet this is the man
whose moral, as well as poetical and literary
character, we are told “it is delightful to contemplate.”

The Earl of Surrey had one sister, Mary,
who was married to Henry Fitzroy, Duke of
Richmond and Somerset, natural son of Henry
<abbr='the eighth'>VIII</abbr>. who died in 1536 at the age of seventeen
without issue. There is a most beautiful
portrait of this lady in Chamberlaine’s collection
of the Holbein Heads. Mr. Lodge exclaims
pathetically “Would that her story had died with
her; and that we might have been at liberty to
fancy the character of so fair a creature as fair as
her countenance. But the truth must be told.
At the iniquitous trial of her brother in 1547,
this lady was called on as a witness and brought
forward a body of evidence against him so
keenly pointed, and so full of secrets, which
from their nature must have been voluntarily
disclosed by her, that we cannot but suspect her
conduct of a degree of rancour, unpardonable in
any case, but in this unnatural.”

.fn #
There is a portrait of this lady among the Holbein
Heads, published by Mr. Chamberlaine.
.fn-
// File: 074.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art23
JEWS IN ENGLAND.
.sp 2
William the Conqueror permitted great
numbers of Jews to come over from Rouen,
and to settle in England in the last year of his
reign. Their number soon increased, and they
spread themselves throughout most of the cities
and capital towns in England where they built
synagogues. There were fifteen hundred at York
about the year 1189. At Bury, in Suffolk, is a very
complete remain of a Jewish synagogue of stone in
the Norman style, large and magnificent. Hence
it was that many of the learned English Ecclesiastics
of those times became acquainted with
their books and language. In the reign of
William Rufus, the Jews were remarkably numerous
at Oxford, and had acquired considerable
property; and some of their Rabbis were permitted
to open a school in the university, where
they instructed not only their own people, but
many Christian students, in Hebrew literature,
about the year 1094. Within 200 years after their
admission or establishment by the Conqueror,
they were banished the kingdom. This circumstance
was highly favourable to the circulation
of their learning in England. The suddenness
of their dismission obliged them for present subsistence,
and other reasons, to sell their moveable
// File: 075.png
.pn +1
goods of all kinds, among which were large
quantities of of Rabbinical books. The monks
in various parts availed themselves of the distribution
of these treasures. At Huntingdon and
Stamford there was a prodigious sale of their
effects, containing immense stores of Hebrew
manuscripts, which were immediately purchased
by Gregory of Huntingdon, prior of the abbey of
Ramsey. Gregory speedily became an adept in
the Hebrew, by means of these valuable acquisitions,
which he bequeathed to his monastery
about the year 1250. Other members of the
same convent, in consequence of these advantages,
are said to have been equal proficients in the same
language, soon after the death of Prior Gregory,
among whom were Robert Dodford, Librarian
of Ramsey, and Laurence Holbech, who compiled
a Hebrew Lexicon. At Oxford a great number
of their books fell into the hands of Roger Bacon,
or were bought by his brethren the Franciscan
friars of that university.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art24
THE ENGLISH BIBLE.
.sp 2
The first translation of any part of the Holy
Scriptures into English that was committed to
the press, was <i>The New Testament</i>, translated
from the Greek, by William Tyndale, with the
// File: 076.png
.pn +1
assistance of John Foye and William Roye, and
printed first in 1526, in octavo.

Tyndale published afterwards, in 1530, a
translation of the <i>Five Books of Moses</i>, and of
<i>Jonah</i>, in 1531, in octavo. An English translation
of the <i>Psalter</i>, done from the Latin of Martin
Bucer, was also published at Strasburgh in 1530,
by Francis Foye, octavo. And the same book
together with <i>Jeremiah</i>, and the <i>Song of Moses</i>,
were likewise published in 1534, in duodecimo,
by George Joye, sometime fellow of Peter-House
in Cambridge.

The first time <i>the whole Bible</i> appeared in
English, was in the year 1535 in folio. The
translator and publisher was Miles Coverdale,
afterwards Bishop of Exeter, who revised Tyndale’s
version, compared it with the original, and
supplied what had been left untranslated by
Tyndale. It was printed at Zurich, and dedicated
to King Henry the Eighth. This was the
Bible, which by Cromwell’s injunction of September,
1536, <i>was ordered to be laid in Churches</i>.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art25
LUXURY OF ANCIENT ROME.
.sp 2
The most remote countries of the ancient
world were ransacked to supply the pomp and
delicacy of Rome. The forests of Scythia
// File: 077.png
.pn +1
afforded some valuable furs. Amber was brought
overland from the shores of the Baltic to the
Danube; and the Barbarians were astonished at
the price which they received in exchange for so
useless a commodity. Pliny has observed with
some humour that even fashion had not found out
the use of amber. Nero sent a Roman knight to
purchase great quantities on the spot where it
was produced. There was a considerable demand
for Babylonian carpets and other manufactures
of the East; but the most important and unpopular
branch of foreign trade was carried on with
Arabia and India. Every year about the time of
the summer solstice, a fleet of a hundred and
twenty vessels sailed from Myoshormos, a port of
Egypt on the Red Sea. By the periodical assistance
of the monsoons, they traversed the ocean in
about forty days. The coast of Malabar, or the
island of Ceylon, was the usual limit of their navigation,
and it was in those markets that the merchants
from the more remote countries of Asia
expected their arrival. The return of the fleet of
Egypt was fixed to the months of December or
January; and as soon as their rich cargo had been
transported on the backs of camels, from the Red
Sea to the Nile, and had descended that river as
far as Alexandria, it was poured without delay, into
the capital of the empire. The objects of oriental
traffic were splendid and trifling; silk, a pound
of which was esteemed not inferior in value to a
// File: 078.png
.pn +1
pound of gold; precious stones, among which the
pearl claimed the first rank after the diamond:
and a variety of aromatics, that were consumed
in religious worship and the pomp of funerals.
The labour and risk of the voyage was rewarded
with almost incredible profit; but the profit
was made upon Roman subjects, and a few individuals
were enriched at the expense of the public.
As the natives of Arabia and India were contented
with the productions and manufactures
of their own country, silver, on the side of the
Romans, was the principal, if not the only instrument
of commerce. It was a complaint worthy
of the gravity of the senate, that in the pursuit of
female ornaments, the wealth of the state was
irrecoverably given away to foreign and hostile
nations. The annual loss is computed by a writer
of an inquisitive, but censorious temper, at
upwards of eight hundred thousand pounds
sterling.[#]

.fn #
Pliny, Hist. Nat. <abbr=twelve>xii.</abbr> 18.
.fn-
.sp 4
.h2 id=art26
RHYME.
.sp 2
Every language has powers, and graces, and
music peculiar to itself; and what is becoming
in one, would be ridiculous in another. Rhyme
was barbarous in Latin and Greek verse, because
// File: 079.png
.pn +1
these languages by the sonorousness of their
words, by their liberty of transposition and inversion,
by their fixed quantities and musical
pronunciation, could carry on the melody of verse
without its aid; and an attempt to construct
English verses after the form of hexameters, and
pentameters, and sapphics, is as barbarous among
us. It is not true that rhyme is merely a
monkish invention. On the contrary, it has
obtained under different forms in the versification
of most known nations. It is found in the
ancient poetry of the northern nations of Europe;
it is said to be found among the Arabs, the Persians,
the Indians, and the Americans. This
shews that there is something in the return of
similar sounds, which is grateful to the ears of
most part of mankind.

The present form of our English heroic
rhyme in couplets, is a modern species of versification.
The measure generally used in the days
of queen Elizabeth, king James, and king
Charles <abbr=one>I.</abbr> was the stanza of eight lines, such as
Spenser employs, borrowed from the Italian, a
measure very constrained and artificial. Waller
was the first who brought couplets into vogue;[#]
and Dryden afterwards established the usage.
Waller first smoothed our verse; Dryden perfected
it. Pope’s versification has a peculiar
// File: 080.png
.pn +1
character. It is flowing and smooth in the highest
degree; far more laboured and correct than
that of any who went before him. He introduced
one considerable change into heroic
verse, by almost throwing aside the triplets,
or three lines rhyming together, in which
Dryden abounded. Dryden’s versification, however,
has very great merit; and like all his productions,
has much spirit, mixed with carelessness.
If not so smooth and correct as Pope’s,
it is however more varied and easy. He subjects
himself less to the rule of closing the sense with
the couplet; and frequently takes the liberty of
making his couplets run into one another, with
somewhat of the freedom of blank verse.

.fn #
Shakespeare, occasionally, in his plays, uses couplets.
.fn-
.sp 4
.h2 id=art27
M. COQUEBERT DE MONTBRET.
.sp 2
This gentleman was one of the commercial
commissioners from France to England during
the short peace which took place after the treaty
of Amiens. In March, 1803, I was in company
with <abbr rend=spell>M.</abbr> de Montbret, who expressed his dissatisfaction
in very angry terms, because he was not
able to procure specimens of the different clays
made use of by Mr. Wedgwood in his manufacture
of earthen ware in Staffordshire. He urged
with much vehemence the politeness and attention
// File: 081.png
.pn +1
that were shewn to Mr. Thomas Wedgwood in
France the preceding summer, when on a visit to
that country, and who it appeared had made
something like a promise that he would send to
France specimens of the various clays made use
of in the potteries. In answer to Monsieur de
Montbret it was observed, that Mr. Thomas
Wedgwood had no concern whatever in the
potteries, and that his brother, Mr. Josiah
Wedgwood, who was the proprietor, would never
give his consent that specimens of the clays
should be sent to France, but on the contrary
always strongly resisted every application for
that purpose. <abbr rend=spell>M.</abbr> de Montbret replied, that as
clay was a natural production, if there was not
that particular sort in France, it would be impossible
to form it by any artificial means—besides, he
only wished to have those things as specimens of
English earths, merely with a view of forming
a collection of the earths and minerals of this
country.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art28
<sc>Dr.</sc> THOMAS PIERCE.
.sp 2
Dr. Pierce, Dean of Sarum, a perpetual
controversialist, and to whom it was dangerous to
refuse a request, lest it might raise a controversy,
asked Dr. Ward, bishop of Salisbury, for a
// File: 082.png
.pn +1
Prebend for his son. He was refused; and
studying revenge, he opened a controversy with
the bishop, maintaining that the king had the
right of bestowing every dignity in all the
Cathedral Churches of the kingdom, and not the
bishops. This required a reply from the bishop,
who had formerly been an active controversialist
himself. Dean Pierce renewed his attack with
a folio volume, entitled “A vindication of the
king’s sovereign right, &c.” Thus it proceeded,
and the web thickened round the bishop in replies
and rejoinders. It cost him many tedious
journeys to London, through bad roads, fretting
at “the king’s sovereign right” all the way;
and in the words of a witness, “in unseasonable
times and weather, that by degrees his spirits
were exhausted, his memory quite gone, and he
was totally unfitted for business.” Such was
the fatal disturbance occasioned by Dean
Pierce’s folio of “The king’s sovereign right.”
.sp 4
.h2 id=art29
WRITING AMONG THE GREEKS.
.sp 2
As a proof of the simplicity of the times described
by Homer, it is a great doubt if his
kings and heroes could write or read; at least
when the Grecian leaders cast lots who should
engage Hector in single combat, in the seventh
// File: 083.png
.pn +1
Iliad, they only made their marks, for when the
lot signed by Ajax fell out of the helmet, and
was carried round by the herald, none of the
chiefs knew to whom it belonged till it was
brought to Ajax himself.

The learned Mr. Wood in his Essay on the
original genius and writings of Homer, after
observing that neither in the Iliad nor Odyssey
is there any thing that conveys the idea of letters
or reading, nor any allusion to literal writing,
adds, “As to symbolical, hieroglyphical, or
picture-like description, something of that kind
was, no doubt, known to Homer, of which the
letter (as it is called) which Bellerophon carried
to the king of Lycia is a proof.” This letter was
sent from Prœtus; (<i>Iliad</i>, <abbr=six>vi.</abbr> line, 168, &c.)

.pm verse-start
“To Lycia the devoted youth he sent,
With <i>marks</i>, expressive of his dire intent
<sc>Grav’d</sc> on a tablet, that the Prince should die.”
.pm verse-end

The probability that Homer lived much
nearer the times he described than is usually
supposed, has been shewn by Mr. Mitford (<i>Hist.
of Greece, Appx. to <abbr=chapter>ch.</abbr> 4.</i>) with all the clearness
of which so distant an event is capable.

To this account of the ignorance of the Greeks
in literal writing may be added that the Mexicans,
though a civilized people, had no alphabet;
the art of writing was no farther advanced among
them than the using of figures composed of painted
// File: 084.png
.pn +1
feathers, by which they made a shift to communicate
some simple thoughts; and in that manner
was the Emperor Montezuma informed of the
landing of the Spaniards in his territories.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art30
ACCOUNT OF THE SCRIPTORIA, OR WRITING ROOMS IN THE MONASTERIES OF ENGLAND.
.sp 2
It would be in vain to attempt to trace the
state of learning among the Anglo-Saxons before
their conversion to Christianity, sometime after
which event, schools and seminaries of learning
were established in the kingdom of Kent, and soon
after the year 635, in that of the East Angles.
Previously to this period of our history, the two
principal scholars of the Britons were Gildas and
Nennius, the first of whom flourished towards the
latter end of the sixth century, and the latter in
the beginning of the seventh. To Gildas we owe
the first lights which are cast upon the troublesome
times of the Britons, and of the miseries
those wretched people suffered by the invasion
and conquests of the Saxons. He has left a short
history of Britain and an epistle, in which he
// File: 085.png
.pn +1
heavily accuses the British princes and clergy
who were contemporary with him.[#]

To Nennius we owe also a short history of the
Britons, and their wars with the Saxons, but the
whole is so concise, and so many miracles are
crowded into it, that it is no easy matter to separate
truth from fiction.
// File: 086.png
.pn +1

Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury, who came
into Britain at the latter end of the seventh century,
contributed greatly to the improvement of
learning. About the same time flourished Aldhelm,
a near relation of Ina, king of the West
Saxons; he was Abbot of Malmesbury, which
monastery himself had founded, and he was afterwards
Bishop of Sherborne, where he died in
the year 709. Besides other works he left a book
on the prosody of the Latin tongue in which he
was very expert, being the first Anglo-Saxon that
ever wrote in that language both in prose and
verse.

On the establishment of Monasteries and Religious
Houses in this kingdom, there was a room
called the <i>Scriptorium</i>, allotted in all the greater
Abbeys, or else some portion of the cloister was
appropriately fitted up for the same purpose,
where their music and missals, the works of the
fathers and other religious books, the latin classics,
and such literary works as the monks could obtain,
were copied. In the old library in Worcester
Cathedral, and in the remaining libraries
of some other Cathedral churches, may still be
seen the manner of writing music, before the invention
of the present notes, and some of the old
copies of books.

By means of these <i>Scriptoria</i>, or writing
rooms, the monks compiled and preserved, the
first annals of Saxon History; without which,
// File: 087.png
.pn +1
however strange the composition of some of them
may appear at this time, this would now have
been a land of darkness, as to any account of
what passed therein, during former ages.

The custom of making this one good use of
monasteries and of christian societies, was derived
from very early days. About the year 220,
Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem, built a library
there, for preserving the epistles of learned
ecclesiastical persons, written one to another;
and their commentaries on the holy scriptures.
And in what manner Origen was aided to write
his admirable works, we learn from Eusebius,
who tells us that he had more than seven notaries
appointed for him, who, every one in his turn,
wrote that which he uttered; and as many more
scriveners, together with <i>maidens</i>, well exercised
and practised in penmanship, who were to write
copies. (<i>Eccl. Hist. of Eusebius Pamphilus, lib.
6. cap. 20 and 21.</i>)

The preservation and progress of science by
means of monasteries, is a very curious fact, and
the precious estimation in which books were
held, when few could read them, is still more so.
Some few learned men existed in different parts
of Europe throughout those times of darkness and
ignorance. Our countryman the Venerable Bede
was well versed both in sacred and profane history,
as his numerous works testify.

<abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Egbert, Archbishop of York, was a disciple
// File: 088.png
.pn +1
of Venerable Bede; he was a man of great learning,
and founded a noble library at York about
735, which was casually burnt in the reign of king
Stephen, with the cathedral, the monastery of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr>
Mary, and several other religious houses.

Alcuin, called also Albinus Flaccus, was born
in Northumberland; he was the disciple of
Archbishop Egbert, whom he succeeded in the
charge of the famous school, which that prelate
had opened at York. Alcuin was in all respects
the most learned man of the age in which he
lived; he was an orator, historian, poet, mathematician,
and divine. The fame of his learning
induced Charlemagne to invite him to his
court; and by his assistance that Emperor,
founded, enriched, and instructed, the universities
of Tours and Paris. In 794 Alcuin was
one of the fathers of the synod of Frankfort, and
died at his abbey at Tours, in 804. In his epistle
to Charlemagne he mentions with great respect
his master Egbert, and the noble library which he
had founded at York. Towards the latter end of
the same century flourished our great king Alfred,
who engaged the learned Grimbald, and other
foreigners of distinguished abilities in his service.

Eadfrid, who was bishop of Lindisfarne in the
year 698, was one of the most learned men of his
time. He translated the gospels into latin, which
work after his death was highly decorated by his
successor with gold and jewels. Bilfrid, a hermit,
// File: 089.png
.pn +1
illuminated it with various paintings and rich devices;
and Adred a priest, interlined it with a
Saxon version. Before each gospel is prefixed a
painting of the evangelist who wrote it, and the
opposite page is full of beautiful ornaments,
enriched with various colours; then follows the
commencement of the gospel, the first page of
which is most elaborately ornamented with letters
of a peculiar form, and very large, which displays
at once the zeal of the writer, and the taste of the
age in which the book was written.[#] This curious
work is now among the Cottonian manuscripts
in the British Museum. It was lost in the sea
during the removal of the body of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Cuthbert
in those troublesome times, about the year 876,
when the Danes were laying waste the whole
country, but it was afterwards found washed up
on the shore without suffering any injury.
(<i>Hutchinson’s History of Durham</i>, 1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 57.)
It was under the patronage of the same learned
prelate Eadfrid, that the Venerable Bede[#] wrote
the life of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Cuthbert.
// File: 090.png
.pn +1

The books which Fergus the second, king of
Scotland, who assisted Alaric the Goth, had
brought with him as a part of the plunder from
Rome, had been deposited in the monastery in
the island of Iona. From thence they were, by
degrees, copied for the use of other monasteries;
and besides these, other books were obtained
afterwards by means of various journeys to
Rome. Benedict Biscop, the founder of the
monastery of Weremouth, and the friend of
Archbishop Wilfrid, made no fewer than five
journeys to Rome to purchase copies of books.
These books became deposited in various monasteries.
Some such were at Canterbury, where
also were books that had been brought from
Rome, both by Augustine and Theodore. And
the letter of Aldhelm, the very person who founded
the monastery of Malmesbury, containing an
account of his studies, and progress at Canterbury
by the help of such books, is one of the most
curious fragments of antiquity. (<i>Angl. Sacra.
tom. 2. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 6.</i>)

// File: 091.png
.pn +1

The price of these books was at various times
enormous. Aldfred, king of Northumberland,
gave <i>eight hides of land</i>, that is, as much as eight
ploughs could till, for one volume of cosmography;
and on this occasion it perhaps ought not
to be forgotten, that there is still preserved in
the library of Hereford cathedral, an ancient
map on parchment, for the illustration of cosmography
as known at the period of its being
drawn. In the reign of William the Conqueror
books were extremely scarce. Grace, Countess
of Anjou, paid for a collection of homilies, two
hundred sheep, a quarter of wheat, another of
rye, and a third of millet, besides a number of
martin skins. (<i>Kaimes’s Sketches</i>, 1. 136.)

In these conventual <i>Scriptoria</i> were copied the
writings of the fathers and the abstruse works of
the first schoolmen; here also were copied little
works of genius, sometimes the effusion of
fancy and imagination. The fables of Æsop
were so much in repute, that we are told king
Alfred himself made a translation of them from the
Greek. The fanciful devices on the friezes and
mouldings of some of our ecclesiastical structures,
which have an allusion to Æsop’s Fables,
had their first origin amongst pious and ingenious
persons, in the peaceful retirement of their conventual
retreats. This remark is much confirmed
by a curious observation which has been lately
made, that even many of the fables themselves
// File: 092.png
.pn +1
that now pass for Æsop’s, seem to have had their
real invention and origin in the abodes of the
religious. In a very curious memoir concerning
the works of Mary, an Anglo-Norman poetess,
born in France, who wrote in the French language
in the reign of king Henry the third of
England, and who among other things translated
the fables of Æsop, it is made to appear that
there were indeed but few of Æsop’s original
fables in her collection, and even those she had
borrowed entirely from England, and the greater
part, from several allusions in them, evidently
shew, that they must have been composed in
monasteries, before her time. (<i>See Hume’s
Hist. of Eng. <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1. 4to. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 68.—King’s Munimenta
Ant. <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 4. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 113.—and Archæologia,
<abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 13. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 36-67.</i>)

It is an interesting circumstance, deserving to
be mentioned on this occasion, that before the
time of Venerable Bede, there lived an Anglo-Saxon
poet, of the name of <i>Cædman</i>, or <i>Kedman</i>,
of the wondrous powers of whose mind Bede
speaks in the highest terms, (<i>Bede’s Eccles.
Hist. book 4. <abbr=chapter>ch.</abbr> 24.</i>) and says he sung of the
creation of the world, of the origin of mankind,
and of the whole history of the book of Genesis.
He died about the year 680, and therefore must
have been contemporary with Etheldreda, who
founded the monastery of Ely. And it is a very
curious fact, little known, that Lye, the author
// File: 093.png
.pn +1
of the Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, translated this
poem, and that therein it was found had been
introduced, almost exactly, the same idea of the
fallen angels, and even the peculiarity of the
nine days falling, and of Satan’s assembling his
<i>Thanes</i>, on their rousing themselves, which was
afterwards introduced by Milton into his Paradise
Lost. This account, Mr. King says, he received
from Dr. Percy, bishop of Dromore,
who had several manuscripts of Lye’s bequeathed
to him; and who was well qualified to investigate
such curious matters of ancient literature.

It should not be forgotten with regard to
manuscripts, the productions of these industrious
penmen in their <i>Scriptoria</i>, that king Alfred is
said by the Saxon writers, to have first received
his eagerness for erudition, in an age when he
himself complained of the general ignorance
even of the clergy, from his mother’s shewing
him a book of Saxon poems, beautifully written,
and illuminated, and promising to give it to
which ever of her sons should soonest learn to
read it.

Until the eleventh century, musical notes were
expressed only by letters of the alphabet; and
till the fourteenth century they were expressed
only by large lozenge-shaped black dots or points,
placed on different lines, one above another,
and then first named <i>ut</i>, <i>re</i>, <i>mi</i>, <i>fa</i>, <i>sol</i>, <i>la</i>, to which
<i>si</i> was afterwards added; and they were all
// File: 094.png
.pn +1
expressed without any distinction as to length of
time; and without any such things as breves,
semi-breves, minims, crotchets, or quavers, &c.
The old psalters in many cathedral churches are
found thus written; and in consequence of this
it was, that the <i>Scriptoria</i> in some other places, as
well as at Gloucester, are found so contrived, as to
have long ranges of seats, or benches, one beyond
another, for the copyists; so that a master or person
standing at one end, and naming each note, it
might quickly be copied out by all, naming it in
succession from one end to the other. Hence the
psalters were more easily copied than any other
books, and it is not a little remarkable that in
the library at Worcester, there is a copy of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr>
Matthew’s gospel, set to music throughout, with
these sort of notes.

In foreign monasteries, the boys and novices
were chiefly occupied in these labours, but the
missals and bibles were ordered to be written by
monks of mature age and discretion. The <i>Scriptorium</i>
of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Albans’s abbey was built by Abbot
Paulin, a Norman, who ordered many volumes
to be written there, about the year 1080. Archbishop
Lanfranc furnished the copies. Estates
were often granted for the support of the <i>Scriptorium</i>;
that at <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Edmundsbury was endowed
with two mills, and in the year 1171, the tithes
of a rectory were appropriated to the cathedral
convent of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Swithin at Winchester, <i>ad Libros
// File: 095.png
.pn +1
transcribendos</i>. Many instances of this species
of benefaction occur from the tenth century.
Nigel, in the year 1160, gave the monks of Ely
two churches, <i>ad libros faciendos</i>.

This employment of copying manuscripts appears
to have been diligently practised at Croyland;
for Ingulphus relates, that when the library
of that convent was burned in the year 1091,
seven hundred volumes were consumed. Fifty-eight
volumes were transcribed at Glastonbury,
during the government of one abbot, about the
year 1300. And in the library of this monastery,
the richest in England, there were upwards of
four hundred volumes in the year 1248. More
than eighty books were thus transcribed for <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr>
Alban’s abbey, by Abbot Whethamstede, who
died about 1400. At the foundation of Winchester
college, by William of Wykeham, about 1393,
one or more transcribers were hired and employed
by the founder to <i>make books</i> for the library. They
transcribed and took their commons within the
college, as appears by computations of expenses
on their account now remaining.

In the monastery of Ely, the Precentor, or
Chantor, was the chief librarian, and had within
his Office, the <i>Scriptorium</i>, where writers were
employed in transcribing books for the library,
and missals and other books used in divine service.
This officer furnished the vellum, parchment,
paper, ink, colours, gums, and other necessaries
// File: 096.png
.pn +1
for limners, used in illuminating their books; and
leather, and other implements for binding, and
keeping them in repair.

Some of the Roman classics were copied in the
English monasteries at a very early period.
Henry, a Benedictine monk of Hyde abbey, near
Winchester, transcribed in the year 1178, Terence,
Boethius, Suetonius, and Claudian. Of these he
formed one volume, illuminating the initials, and
forming the brazen bosses of the covers with his
own hands; but this abbot had more devotion
than taste, for he exchanged this manuscript a
few years afterwards for four missals, the legend
of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Christopher, and <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Gregory’s <sc>Pastoral
Care</sc>, with the Prior of the neighbouring
cathedral convent. Benedict, abbot of Peterborough,
author of the latin chronicle of king
Henry the second, amongst a great variety of
scholastic and theological treatises, transcribed
Seneca’s epistles and tragedies, Terence, Martial,
and Claudian, to which may be added
<sc>Gesta Alexandri</sc>, about the year 1180.

In a catalogue of the books of the library of
Glastonbury, we find Livy, Sallust, Seneca,
Tully de <sc>Senectute</sc> and <sc>Amicitia</sc>, Virgil,
Persius, and Claudian, in the year 1248. Among
the royal manuscripts of the British Museum, is
one of the twelve books of Statius’s Thebaid,
supposed to have been written in the tenth century,
which once belonged to the cathedral
// File: 097.png
.pn +1
convent of Rochester. And another of Virgil’s
Æneid, written in the thirteenth, which came
from the library of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Austin’s, Canterbury.
Wallingford, abbot of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Alban’s, gave or
sold from the library of that monastery to
Richard de Bury, bishop of Durham, author of
the “<sc>Philobiblion</sc>,” and a great collector
of books, Terence, Virgil, Quintilian, and
Jerome against Rufinus, together with thirty-two
other volumes, valued at fifty pounds of silver.
The scarcity of parchment undoubtedly prevented
the transcription of many other books in these
societies. About the year 1120, one Master
Hugh, being appointed by the convent of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr>
Edmundsbury in Suffolk, to write and illuminate
a grand copy of the bible for their library, could
procure no parchment for this purpose in England.
It is to this scarcity of parchment that
we owe the loss and destruction of many valuable
manuscripts of the ancients, which otherwise
might have been preserved to us. The venerable
fathers who employed themselves in erasing the
writing of some of the best works of the most
eminent Greek or Latin authors for the purpose of
transcribing upon the obliterated parchment or
vellum the lives of saints, or legendary tales,
possibly mistook these lamentable depredations
for works of piety. The ancient fragment of the
91st book of Livy, discovered by Mr. Burns in
the Vatican, in 1772, was found to be much
// File: 098.png
.pn +1
defaced in this respect by the pious labours of
some well-intentioned monk.

The monks of Durham having begun to build
a college for their novices at Oxford, about the
year 1290, Richard de Bury, bishop of Durham,
not only assisted, but also partly endowed it. At
his decease, in 1345, he left to this college, then
called Durham, and since Trinity, college, all his
books, which were more in number than all the
bishops in England then possessed, in order
that the students of that college, and of the University,
might, under certain conditions make use
of them. After the college came into possession
of these books, they were, for many years, kept
in chests, under the custody of several scholars
deputed for that purpose, and a library being
built in the reign of king Henry the fourth,
these books were put into pews or studies, and
chained to them. They continued in this manner
till the college was dissolved by king Henry
the eighth, when they were conveyed away,
some to Duke Humphrey’s library, where they
remained till the reign of king Edward the
sixth, and others to the library of Baliol college.
Some which remained came into the hands of
Dr. George Owen, a physician of Godstow, who
purchased Trinity college of Edward the sixth.

The bishop of Durham wrote a treatise containing
rules for the management of the library
above-mentioned, describing how the books were
// File: 099.png
.pn +1
to be preserved, and upon what conditions they
were to be lent out to scholars, and appointed
five keepers, to whom he granted yearly salaries.
This treatise he called “<i>Philobiblion</i>,” from
whence he himself came to be called by the
same name, “a lover of books,” and this very
justly, if, as he says himself in the preface to it,
his love of them was so violent that it put him
into a kind of rapture, and made him neglect all
his other affairs. He finished it at Auckland, the
<abbr='twenty-fourth'>24th</abbr> of January, 1345, being then just 63 years
of age. It was printed at Spires in 1483; at
Paris, by Badius Ascensius, in 1500; by the
learned Thomas James, at Oxford, in 1599, in
quarto; and at Leipsic, in 1674, at the end
of <i>Philologicarum Epistolarum Centuria una, ex
Bibliotheca Melch. Hamingfeldii</i>. It appears also in
manuscript in the Cottonian library, in the royal
library, and in other libraries in Oxford and
Cambridge.

The “<i>Philobiblion</i>,” is written in very indifferent
Latin, and in a declamatory style. It is divided
into twenty chapters. In chapter 1. the
author praises wisdom, and books in which it is
contained. 2. That books are to be preferred to
riches and pleasure. 3. That they ought to be
always bought. 4. How much good arises from
books, and that they are misused only by ignorant
people. 5. That good monks write books,
but the bad ones are otherwise employed.
// File: 100.png
.pn +1
6. The praise of the ancient begging friars, with
a reproof of the modern ones. 7. He bewails
the loss of books by fire and wars. 8. He shews
what fine opportunities he had had of collecting
books, whilst he was chancellor and treasurer, as
well as during his embassies. 9. That the
ancients outdid the moderns in hard studying.
10. That learning is by degrees arrived at perfection,
and that he had procured a Greek and
Hebrew grammar. 11. That the law and law
books are not properly learning. 12. The usefulness
and necessity of grammar. 13. An
apology for poetry, and the usefulness of it.
14. Who ought to love books. 15. The manifold
advantages of learning. 16. Of writing
new books and mending the old. 17. Of using
books well, and how to place them. 18. An
answer to his calumniators. 19. Upon what
conditions books are to be lent to strangers.
20. Conclusion.

In the “<i>Philobiblion</i>” the bishop apologizes
for admitting the poets into his collection;
<i>quare non negleximus Fabulas Poetarum</i>. But he
is more complaisant to the prejudices of his age,
where he says, that the laity are unworthy to be
admitted to any commerce with books: <i>Laici
omnium librorum communione sunt indigni</i>. He
prefers books of the liberal arts to treatises of the
law. He laments that good literature had entirely
ceased in the university of Paris. He
// File: 101.png
.pn +1
admits <i>Panfletos exiguos</i> into his library. He
employed <i>Stationarios</i> and <i>Librarios</i>, not only in
England, but in France, Italy, and Germany.
He regrets the total ignorance of the greek
language; but adds that he has provided for the
students of his library both Greek and Hebrew
grammars. He calls Paris the “paradise of the
world,” and says that he purchased there a
variety of invaluable volumes in all sciences,
which yet were neglected and perishing. While
he was Chancellor and Treasurer of England,
instead of the usual presents and new year’s
gifts appendant to his office, he chose to receive
those perquisites in books. By the favour of
king Edward the third, he gained access to the
libraries of the principal monasteries, where
he shook off the dust from various volumes preserved
in chests and presses, which had not been
opened for many ages.

There were several collections of manuscripts
in England before the general restoration of
science in Europe, which had at different times
been brought hither by those who had travelled
into foreign countries; these were chiefly preserved
in the two Universities, in the cathedral
churches, and in religious houses, but in the
fifteenth and sixteenth century several valuable
libraries were formed in England.

In the reign of king Henry the sixth, Humphrey,
Duke of Gloucester, fourth and youngest
// File: 102.png
.pn +1
son of king Henry the fourth, was a singular
promoter of literature, just at the dawning of
science and learning. However unqualified this
eminent personage was for political intrigue, and
to contend with his malicious and powerful enemies,
among whom the Cardinal Beaufort was
the principal, he was nevertheless the common
friend and patron of all the scholars of his time.
A sketch of his character and pursuits, as being
closely connected with the progress of English
literature, cannot fail of proving interesting,
more especially as they are peculiarly associated
with the subject of the present inquiry.

About the year 1440, the Duke gave to the
University of Oxford a library, containing six
hundred volumes, one hundred and twenty only
of which were valued at more than one thousand
pounds of the money of that day. These books,
it need not be observed, were all in manuscript,
the art of printing not having then been discovered;
they are called <i>Novi Tractatus</i>, or New
Treatises, in the University Register, and are
said to be <i>admirandi apparatus</i>. They were the
most splendid and costly copies that could be
procured, finely written on vellum, and elegantly
embellished with miniatures and illuminations.
Among the rest was a translation into French of
Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Only a single specimen
of these valuable volumes was suffered to remain;
it is a beautiful manuscript, in folio, of Valerius
// File: 103.png
.pn +1
Maximus, enriched with the most elegant decorations,
and written in Duke Humphrey’s age,
evidently with a design of being placed in this
sumptuous collection. All the rest of the books,
which, like this, being highly ornamented, looked
like missals, were destroyed or removed by the
pious visitors of the University, in the reign of
king Edward the sixth, whose zeal was equalled
only by their ignorance, or perhaps by their
avarice. A great number of classics, in this
grand work of reformation, were condemned as
anti-christian, and some of the books, in this
library, had even been before this, either stolen
or mutilated. In the library of Oriel College, at
Oxford, we find a manuscript <i>Commentary on
Genesis</i>, written by John Capgrave, a monk,
belonging to the monastery of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Austin, at
Canterbury, a learned theologist of the fifteenth
century. In it is the author’s autograph, and
the work is dedicated to Humphrey, Duke of
Gloucester. In the superb initial letter of the
dedicatory epistle, is a curious illumination of the
author Capgrave, humbly presenting his book to
his patron, the Duke, who is seated, and covered
with a sort of hat. At the end of the volume is
this entry, in the hand-writing of Duke Humphrey
“C’est Livre est a moy Humfrey,
Duc de Gloucestre, du don de Frere Jehan Capgrave,
quy le me fist presenter a mon manoyr de
Pensherst le jour ... de l’an <sc>MCCCCXXXVIII.</sc>”
// File: 104.png
.pn +1
This is one of the books which Humphrey gave
to his new library at Oxford, destroyed or dispersed
by the active reformers of the young
Edward. He also gave to the same library
Capgrave <i>Super Exodum et Regum Libros</i>.

John Whethamstede, a learned abbot of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr>
Alban’s, and a lover of scholars, but accused by
his monks of neglecting their affairs, while he
was too deeply engaged in studious employments,
and in procuring transcripts of useful books, notwithstanding
his unwearied assiduity in beautifying
and enriching their monastery, was in high
favour with this munificent prince. The Duke
was fond of visiting this monastery, and employed
Abbot Whethamstede to collect valuable books
for him. Some of Whethamstede’s tracts, manuscript
copies of which often occur in our libraries,
are dedicated to the Duke, who presented many
of them, particularly a fine copy of Whethamstede’s
<i>Granarium</i>, an immense work, which
Leland calls <i>ingens volumen</i> to the new library.
The copy of Valerius Maximus, mentioned before,
has a curious table or index, made by Whethamstede.
Many other Abbots paid their court to
the Duke, by sending him presents of books, the
margins of which were adorned with the most
exquisite paintings.

Gilbert Kymer, physician to king Henry the
sixth, and holding, among other ecclesiastical
preferments, the Deanery of Salisbury and
// File: 105.png
.pn +1
Chancellorship of the University of Oxford; the
latter dignity by the recommendatory letters of
the Duke, inscribed to the Duke of Gloucester his
famous medical system—<i>Diætarium de Sanitatis
Custodia</i>—in the year 1424.

Lydgate,[#] one of the early English poets, translated
Boccacio’s book, <i>De Casibus Virorum
illustrium</i>, at the recommendation and command,
and under the protection and superintendance,
of Duke Humphrey, whose condescension in
conversing with learned ecclesiastics, and diligence
in study, the translator displays at large,
and in the strongest expressions of panegyric.
He compares the Duke to Julius Cæsar, who,
amidst the weightier cares of state, was not
// File: 106.png
.pn +1
ashamed to enter the rhetorical school of Cicero
at Rome. Nor was his patronage confined only
to English scholars. His favour was solicited
by the most celebrated writers of France and
Italy, many of whom he bountifully rewarded.
Leonard Aretin,[#] one of the first restorers of the
Greek tongue in Italy, (which language he
learned of Emanuel Chrysoloras,[#]) and of polite
// File: 107.png
.pn +1
literature in general, dedicates to this universal
patron his elegant Latin translation of Aristotle’s
<i>Politics</i>. The copy presented to the Duke by
the translator, most elegantly illuminated, is now
in the Bodleian library.

To the same noble encourager of learning,
Petrus Candidus, the friend of Laurentius Valla,[#]
// File: 108.png
.pn +1
and secretary to the great Cosmo, Duke of Milan,
inscribed by the advice of the Archbishop of
Milan, a Latin version of Plato’s <i>Republic</i>. An
illuminated manuscript of this translation is in
the British Museum, perhaps the copy presented,
with two epistles from the Duke to Petrus
Candidus.

Petrus de Monte, another learned Italian of
Venice, in the dedication of his treatise—<i>De
Virtutum et Vitiorum differentia</i>—to the Duke of
Gloucester, mentions the latter’s ardent attachment
to books of all kinds, and the singular
avidity with which he pursued every species of
literature.

A tract entitled <i>Comparatio Studiorum et Rei
Militaris</i>, written by Lopus de Castellione, a
Florentine civilian, and a great translator into
// File: 109.png
.pn +1
Latin of the Greek classics, is also inscribed to
the Duke at the desire of Zeno, archbishop of
Bayeux. It must not be forgotten that our
illustrious Duke invited into England the learned
Tito Livio of Foro-Juli, whom he naturalized
and constituted his poet and orator. He also
retained learned foreigners in his service, for the
purpose of transcribing, and of translating from
Greek into Latin. One of these was Antonio de
Beccaria, a Veronese, who translated into Latin
prose the Greek poem of <i>Dionysius Afer de Situ
Orbis</i>; whom the Duke also employed to translate
into Latin six tracts of Athanasius. This
translation, inscribed to the Duke, is now among
the royal manuscripts in the British Museum,
and at the end, in his own hand-writing, is the
following insertion:—“C’est Livre est a moi
Homphrey Duc le Gloucestre: le quel je fis
translater de grec en latin par un de mes secretaires
Antoyne de Beccara ne de Verone.”

An astronomical tract, entitled, by Leland,
<i>Fabulæ Directionum</i>, is erroneously supposed to
have been written by Duke Humphrey. But it
was compiled at the Duke’s instance, and according
to tables which he had himself constructed,
called by the anonymous author in his preface,
<i>Tabulas illustrissimi principis et nobilissimi Domini
mei, Humfredi, &c.</i> In the library of Gresham
College, however, there is a scheme of calculations
in astronomy, which bears his name.
// File: 110.png
.pn +1
Astronomy was then a favourite science; nor is
it to be doubted that he was intimately acquainted
with the politer branches of knowledge which
now began to acquire estimation, and which his
liberal and judicious attention greatly contributed
to restore.

.tb

King Edward the fourth and Henry the seventh
greatly assisted the cause of learning, by the
encouragement they gave to the art of printing
in England, and by purchasing such books as
were printed in other countries. William Warham,
archbishop of Canterbury, purchased many
valuable Greek manuscripts which had been
brought hither by the prelates and others after the
taking of Constantinople by the Turks.

King Henry the eighth may justly be called
the founder of the royal library, which was enriched
with the manuscripts selected from the
<i>scriptoria</i> and libraries of the principal monasteries,
by that indefatigable antiquary John
Leland.

Matthew Parker, archbishop of Canterbury,
enriched the library of the college of Corpus
Christi, with a great number of ancient and curious
manuscripts.

In the reign of Queen Elizabeth, Sir Thomas
Bodley greatly increased the public library at
Oxford, which is now called by his name. This
great benefactor to the literature of his country,
// File: 111.png
.pn +1
quitted the court, and applied himself wholly to
the purchasing of books and manuscripts both at
home and abroad. By these means he had the
satisfaction of furnishing that library with 1294
manuscripts, which by the subsequent liberality
of many great and illustrious persons, has been
since increased to more than eight thousand
volumes, including the manuscripts given by
Tanner, Bishop of Norwich, and the valuable
library bequeathed by the will of Dr. Richard
Rawlinson.

Considerable augmentations were made to the
libraries of the several colleges in the two universities,
as also to those of our cathedral churches,
the palace at Lambeth, the Inns of Court, the
College of Arms, and others; catalogues of which
were published at Oxford in 1697 under the title
of <i>Catalogus Manuscriptorum Angliæ et Hiberniæ</i>.

Bodley’s great contemporary, Sir Robert
Cotton, is also entitled to the gratitude of posterity
for his diligence in collecting the Cottonian
library; he was engaged in the pursuit of manuscripts
and records upwards of forty years,
during which time he spared neither trouble nor
expense.

The noble manuscript library founded by
Robert Harley, Earl of Oxford, and greatly enriched
by his son Edward, who inherited his
father’s love of science, claims a distinguished
place in every account which may be given of
// File: 112.png
.pn +1
the literary treasures of antiquity in general, and
of this country in particular. Posterity will ever
be indebted to her grace the Duchess Dowager
of Portland, for securing this inestimable treasure
of learning to the public, by authority of Parliament,
under the guardianship of the most distinguished
persons of the realm, both for rank and
abilities, whose excellent regulations have made
this library, as also the Royal, Cottonian, Sloanian,
and others, now deposited in the British Museum,
easy of access, and consequently of real use to the
philosopher, the statesman, the historian, the
scholar, and the artist.[#]

.fn #
Gildas, called <i>Badonicus</i>, because said to be born at Bath,
was, for his singular prudence and the severity of his morals,
surnamed the <sc>WISE</sc>; he was a monk of Bangor, and his
“Description of the state of Britain,” above alluded to, is
the only one of his writings extant, as we are assured by
Archbishop Usher. Gildas wrote this work in Latin, in a
style, according to that age, harsh and perplexed enough.
The first printed edition of it was published by Polydore
Virgil, in octavo, London, 1525, and dedicated to Cuthbert
Tunstal, Bishop of Durham, which, however, was from an
incorrect copy. It was reprinted at Basil, in 12mo, in 1541;
and at London, 1548, though Bishop Nicolson says 1568.
It was again printed at London, in 12mo, in 1638, translated
by Thomas Habingdon, of Henlip, in Worcestershire.
John Josseline, secretary to Archbishop Parker, reprinted
Gildas more correctly from two new manuscripts, Basil, 1568,
12mo; and Paris 1576; but these are little more perfect than
the first.—The latest and best copy of Gildas is in Dr. Gale’s
collection of Ancient English Historians, 2 vols. folio, Oxford,
1687 and 1691; who had the advantage of a more ancient and
better copy, as Bishop Nicolson observes. Besides Habingdons’s
translation above mentioned, there was another printed
during the Cromwell rebellion, in 1652, for the mere purpose,
it has been said, of retailing Gildas’s sharp reproofs of Kings
and Priests.—For an account of this edition, see Oldys’s
British Librarian, and Savage’s Librarian, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 117.
.fn-
.fn #
Strutt, in his “Chronicle of England” has given a plate
representing a page of this manuscript, and in Astle’s
“History of Writing,” there is a plate of the same page,
coloured, in imitation of the original.
.fn-
.fn #
Bede, commonly called the Venerable Bede, was the
most learned man of the age in which he lived; he was born
at Weremouth, in Northumberland, in the year 672. Both
ancient and modern authors have bestowed the highest
encomiums upon the learning of this extraordinary man.
His works are many, making eight large volumes, in folio,
the principal of which is his Ecclesiastical History of the
Anglo-Saxons, consisting of five books, from whence the
more perfect part of our early history is formed; his other
works are the Lives of Saints, Treatises on the Holy Scriptures,
and Philosophical Tracts. This great man died at his
cell at Jarrow, in the year 735, aged 63.
.fn-
.fn #
Lydgate was commonly called the Monk of Bury,
because born at that place, about the year 1380. After
some time spent in the English Universities, he travelled
through France and Italy, in which countries he greatly
improved himself. In addition to his poetical talents, he is
described as being an eloquent rhetorician, an expert mathematician,
an acute philosopher, and no mean divine. He is
said to have been so much admired by his contemporaries,
that they said of him, that his wit was fashioned by the
Muses themselves. After his return from France and Italy,
he became tutor to the sons of several of the nobility, and
for his excellent endowments, was much esteemed and reverenced
by them. He wrote a poem, called <i>The Life and
Death of Hector</i>, some satires, eulogies, and odes, and other
learned works in prose. He died in 1440, aged sixty, and
was buried in his own convent at Bury. Lydgate is said to
have been a disciple of Chaucer.
.fn-
.fn #
Leonard Aretin, the disciple of Chrysoloras, was a linguist,
an orator, and an historian; the secretary of four
successive Popes; and Chancellor of the Republic of Florence,
where he died in 1444, aged seventy-five. He added
a Supplement to Livy on the Punic War, and wrote the
History of Italy, with other valuable works.
.fn-
.fn #
Emanuel Chrysoloras was one of the envoys sent by
the Greek Emperor Manuel, at the end of the fourteenth
century, to implore the compassion of the Western Princes.
He was not only conspicuous for the nobleness of his birth
but also for the extent of his learning. After visiting the
courts of France and England, in furtherance of his mission,
he was invited to assume the office of a Professor, and
Florence had the honour of this invitation, as it had had a
few years previously that of the first Greek Professor Leo
Pilatus, whose mind was stored with a treasure of Greek
learning, with whom history and fable, philosophy and
grammar, were alike familiar, and who first read the Poems
of Homer in the Schools of Florence. Chrysoloras may be
considered as the founder of the Greek language in Italy,
and his knowledge not only of the Greek, but of the Latin
tongue, surpassed the expectation of the Florentine republic.
At the same time and place, the Latin classics were explained
by John of Ravenna, the domestic pupil of the celebrated
Petrarch. The Italians, who illustrated their age and
country, were formed in this double school, and Florence
became the fruitful seminary of Greek and Roman erudition.
Chrysoloras was recalled by the Emperor from the college to
the court, but he afterwards taught at Pavia and Rome with
equal industry and applause. He died at Constance on a
public mission from the Emperor to the council. <i>Gibbon’s
Hist.</i> <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 12. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 126.
.fn-
.fn #
Laurentius Valla, was a native of Placenza, where he
was born in 1415; he revived the Latin language from
gothic barbarity, but he was a rigorous critic. He fell
under the displeasure of the Church of Rome, for the freedom
with which he hazarded his opinions respecting some of its
doctrines, and he was condemned to be burnt, but was saved
by Alphonsus, king of Naples. Pope Nicholas the fifth,
who was himself one of the greatest encouragers of learning
of his time, and who highly respected the talents of Valla,
invited him to Rome, and gave him a pension.—This Pope,
whose pursuits were in direct association with our present
subject, from a plebeian origin, raised himself by his virtue
and his learning to the highest honours of the Church. The
character of the man prevailed over the interest of the Pontiff,
and he sharpened those weapons which were soon pointed
against the religion of Rome. He had been the friend of the
most eminent scholars of the age, and after his elevation to
the chair of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Peter, he became their patron. Under Pope
Nicholas, the influence of the Holy See pervaded Christendom,
and he exerted that influence in the search, not of benefices,
but of books. From the ruins of the Byzantine libraries,
from the darkest monasteries of Germany and Britain, he
collected the dusty manuscripts of the writers of antiquity;
and whenever the original could not be removed, a faithful
copy was transcribed and transmitted for his use. The
Vatican was daily replenished with precious furniture, and
such was his industry, that in a reign of eight years, he
formed a library of five thousand volumes. To his munificence
the Latin world was indebted for the versions of Xenophon,
Diodorus, Polybius, Thucydides, Herodotus, and
Appian; of Strabo’s Geography, of the Iliad, of the more
valuable works of Plato and Aristotle, of Ptolemy, and
Theophrastus, and of the Fathers of the Greek Church.
.fn-
.fn #
For an account of the following Manuscript Libraries
in England, see Savage’s Librarian, 3 vols. London, 1808-1810—namely,
that of the British Museum, in <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 26;
of the Royal Society, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 71; of the Heralds Office, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 73;
of the Society of Antiquaries, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 129; of the Archbishop of
Canterbury’s at Lambeth Palace, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 133; of Lincoln’s Inn,
p. 183, 225; of the Middle Temple, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 273; of the Inner
Temple, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 2. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 131; of the Lansdown Collection of
Manuscripts, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 34, and <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 3. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 27, and of the
Cottonian Manuscripts, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 3. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 31.

The curious reader who is interested in the history of the
public records of his country, will find in the same volumes,
the Report of the Committee of the House of Commons on
the State of the Records, in <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 17, &c.—an account
of the Records in the Tower of London, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 2. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 34, &c. of
those in the Rolls Chapel, ibid. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 185, &c. and of those in
the Chapter House of Westminster Abbey, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 3. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 41, &c.
.fn-
// File: 113.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art34
TORTURE IN ENGLAND.[#]
.sp 2
In the reign of King Henry the Sixth, the
<sc>Rack</sc> or <sc>Brake</sc>, was placed in the Tower of
London, by the Duke of Exeter, when he and
the Earl of Suffolk had formed the design of introducing
the Civil Law into England. It was
called “Exeter’s daughter,” and remained afterwards
in the Tower, “where it was occasionally
used as an <i>Engine of State</i>, more than once in
the <i>reign of Elizabeth</i>.”

Though the use of the Rack does not appear
to have been known in this country until the
<abbr='twenty-sixth'>26th</abbr> year of Henry the Sixth, and though it was
never authorized by the law, yet to borrow the
expression of Mr. Justice Blackstone, it was
occasionally used as an “Engine of State,” to
extort confession from State Prisoners confined in
the Tower, from the time of its introduction,
until finally laid aside in consequence of the
decision of the judges in Felton’s case. One
Hawkins was tortured[#] in the reign of Henry the
Sixth; and the case of Anne Askew,[#] in that of
// File: 114.png
.pn +1
Henry the Eighth,[#] cannot escape the recollection
of every reader of English history. The Lord
Chancellor Wriothesely (I blush for the honour
and humanity of an English Judge while I
write his name) went to the Tower to take her
examination, and upon the Lieutenant’s refusing
to draw the cords tighter, <i>drew them himself</i>
till every limb was dislocated, and her body
nearly torn asunder. In Mary’s reign several
persons were racked in order to extort confessions,
which was upon account of Sir Thomas
Wyat’s rebellion. And Barrington mentions
that in Oldmixon’s History of England (p. 284,)
one Simpson is said to have been tortured in
1558, and a confession extorted.

In the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth,[#] the
// File: 115.png
.pn +1
Rack was used upon offenders against the State,
and among others, upon Francis Throgmorton;
in 1571, upon Charles Baillie an attendant upon
the Bishop of Ross, Mary’s ambassador, and upon
Banastre, one of the Duke of Norfolk’s servants;
and Barker, another of his servants was brought
to confess by extreme fear of it. In 1581,
Campion, the Jesuit, was put upon the rack,[#]
and in 1585, Thomas Morgan writes to the
Queen of Scots, that he has heard D. Atslow was
racked in the Tower, twice about the Earl of
Arundel. This is the last instance of the actual
application of torture to extort confession.

For the greater part of this reign the application
of torture in the examination of State offenders
seems to have been in common use, and its
legality not disputed. Mr. Daines Barrington
says,[#] that among the manuscript papers of Lord
Ellesmere, is a copy of instructions to him, as
Lord President of the Marches, to use the torture
on the taking of some examinations at Ludlow;
and Sir Edward Coke himself,[#] in the year 1600,
(the <abbr='fourth-third'>43d</abbr> of Elizabeth’s reign) then being Attorney
General, at the trials of the Earls of Essex and
Southampton, boasted of the clemency of the
// File: 116.png
.pn +1
Queen, because, though the rebellious attempts
were so exceedingly heinous, yet out of her
princely mercy “no person was racked, tortured,
or pressed to speak any thing further than of their
own accord.” And in the Countess of Shrewsbury’s
case (10 James <abbr=first>1st</abbr>) when Sir Edward was
Chief Justice, in enumerating the privileges of the
nobility, he mentions as one, that their bodies were
not subject to torture <lang=la><i>in causa criminis læsæ majestatis</i></lang>.
Barrington justly observes[#] there was a regular
establishment for torture, for at his trial,[#] in
the first year of James the first, Sir Walter Raleigh
stated that Kemish had been threatened with the
rack, and the keeper of the instrument sent for.
Sir William Wade, who, with the Solicitor General
had taken his examination, denied it, but admitted
they had told him he deserved it, and
Lord Howard declared, “Kemish was never on
the rack, <i>the king gave charge that no rigour should
be used</i>.”

Barrington mentions[#] that Sir John Hayward,
the historian, was threatened with the rack, which
Dr. Granger confirms; and the former also remarks
that it is stated in King James’s works, that
the rack was shewn to Guy Faukes when under
examination.
// File: 117.png
.pn +1

Down to this period we do not find the legality
of the practice questioned, though it has been said
by high authority, as will be stated presently,
that some doubts had been suggested to Queen
Elizabeth. State Prisoners were confined usually
in the Tower, and commissioners, attended by
the law officers of the crown, were sent to examine
them, who applied the rack at their own discretion,
or according to the order of the privy council, or
the king’s, without any objection being made to
their authority.

In the third year of King Charles the first,
Felton was threatened with the rack by the Earl
of Dorset in the Tower, and Laud, then bishop of
London, repeated the threats in council, but the
king insisted upon the judges being consulted as
to the legality of the application, and they being
unanimously of opinion that it was illegal, it was
never attempted afterwards. The answer which
Felton made to Laud’s threats, is well worthy of
attention; when Laud told him “if he would not
confess he must go to the rack,” he replied “if it
must be so, he could not tell whom he might nominate
in the extremity of torture, and if what
he should say then was to go for truth, he could
not tell whether his Lordship (meaning the
bishop of London) or which of their Lordships
he might name, for torture might draw unexpected
things from him.”

In the year 1680 (32 Charles <abbr=second>2d</abbr>) Elizabeth
// File: 118.png
.pn +1
Collier was tried at the Old Bailey,[#] before Mr.
Baron Weston, for the publication of a libel, in
which many circumstances were related for the
purpose of inducing a belief that Prance, when a
prisoner in Newgate, had been tortured there,
and he was produced to prove the falsehood of the
publication. The learned judge in summing up
the evidence to the jury said, “But you must
first know the laws of the land do not admit a
torture, and since Queen Elizabeth’s time there
hath been nothing of that kind ever done. The
truth is indeed, in the twentieth year of her reign,
Campion was just stretched upon the rack, but
yet not so but he could walk; but when she was
told it was against the law of the land to have any
of her subjects racked (though that was an extraordinary
case, a world of seminaries being
sent over to contrive her death, and she lived in
continual danger) yet it was never done after
to any one, neither in her reign, who reigned
twenty-five years, nor in king James’s reign, who
reigned twenty-two years after, nor in king
Charles the first’s reign, who reigned twenty-four
years after; and <sc>God</sc> in Heaven knows there
hath been no such thing offered in this king’s
reign; for I think we may say we have lived
under as lawful and merciful a government as any
people whatsoever, and have as little blood shed,
and sanguinary executions as any nation under
heaven.”
// File: 119.png
.pn +1

The learned judge may have been mistaken
when stating Campion to be the last person racked,
for in Murden’s state papers, one Atslow, as before
observed, is mentioned to have been tortured four
years afterwards. Mr. Baron Weston states that
upon a suggestion made to Queen Elizabeth of
the illegality of the practice, it was discontinued
in her reign, and thus we may account for
Campion being racked with so little severity, as
to be able to walk afterwards, and to manage the
conferences with protestant doctors during his
confinement in prison.

In the Jurisprudence of the Romans the
deceitful and dangerous experiment of the criminal
<i>quæstion</i>, as it is emphatically styled, was admitted,
rather than approved. The Roman
government applied this sanguinary mode of
examination only to servile bodies, whose sufferings
were seldom weighed by those haughty Republicans
in the scale of justice or humanity;
but they would never consent to violate the
sacred person of a citizen, till they possessed the
clearest evidence of his guilt.[#] The annals of
tyranny, from the reign of Tiberius to that of
Domitian, circumstantially relate the executions
of many innocent victims; but as long as the
faintest remembrance was kept alive of the
// File: 120.png
.pn +1
national freedom and honour, the last hours of a
Roman were secure from the danger of ignominious
torture. The conduct of the provincial
magistrates was not, however, regulated by the
practice of the city, or the strict maxims of the
Civilians. They found the use of torture established
not only among the slaves of oriental
despotism, but among the Macedonians, who
obeyed a limited monarch; among the Rhodians,
who flourished by the liberty of commerce; and
even among the sage Athenians, who had asserted
and adorned the dignity of human nature.[#]
The acquiescence of the people in the provinces
encouraged their governors to acquire or perhaps
to usurp, a discretionary power of employing the
Rack, to extort from vagrants or plebeian criminals
the confession of their guilt, till they insensibly
proceeded to confound the distinctions
of rank, and to disregard the privileges of
Roman citizens. The apprehensions of the
subjects urged them to solicit, and the interest
of the Sovereign engaged him to grant, a
// File: 121.png
.pn +1
variety of special exemptions, which tacitly
allowed, and even authorized, the general use of
torture. They protected all persons of illustrious
or honourable rank, bishops and their presbyters,
professors of the liberal arts, soldiers and
their families, municipal officers, and their posterity
to the third generation, and all children
under the age of puberty. But a fatal maxim
was introduced into the new jurisprudence of the
Empire, that in the case of treason, which included
every offence that the subtlety of lawyers
could derive from an <i>hostile intention</i> towards the
prince or republic, all privileges were suspended
and all conditions were reduced to the same ignominious
level. As the safety of the Emperor
was avowedly preferred to every consideration
of justice or humanity, the dignity of age, and
the tenderness of youth were alike exposed to
the most cruel tortures; and the terrors of a
malicious information, which might select them
as the accomplices, or even as the witnesses,
perhaps, of an imaginary crime, perpetually hung
over the heads of the principal citizens of the
Roman world.[#]

.fn #
<i>Vide</i> Serjeant Heywood’s Vindication of Mr. Fox’s
History of James the Second, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 397.
.fn-
.fn #
Fuller’s Worthies, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 317.
.fn-
.fn #
There is a small book, printed in black letter, containing
an account of the treatment and trial of Anne Askew,
which contains many curious particulars.—She was the
daughter of Sir William Askew, of Kelsay, in the county of
Lincoln, where she was born about 1520. She had a learned
education, and while young was married to a person of the
name of Kyme, much against her inclination. On account
of some harsh treatment from her husband, she went to the
Court of Henry the Eighth to sue for a separation, where she
was greatly taken notice of by those ladies who were attached
to the Reformation; in consequence of which, she was arrested,
and having confessed her religious principles, was committed
to Newgate. She was first racked with savage cruelty in the
Tower, and then burnt in Smithfield, in 1546, in company
with her tutor, and two other persons of the same faith. From
her letters and other pieces in Fox and Strype, it appears she
was an accomplished, as well as a pious, woman.
.fn-
.fn #
Burnet’s Reformation, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 325; <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 2. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 382.
.fn-
.fn #
Collier’s Eccl. Hist. <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 2. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 591.—Murden’s State
Papers, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 9, 101.
.fn-
.fn #
Collier’s Eccl. Hist. <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 2. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 139.—Murden’s State
Papers, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 452.
.fn-
.fn #
Observations on Ancient Statutes, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 496, <i>note</i>.
.fn-
.fn #
State Trials, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 199.
.fn-
.fn #
Observations on Statutes, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 495.
.fn-
.fn #
State Trials, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 221.
.fn-
.fn #
Observations on Statutes, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 92.
.fn-
.fn #
State Trials, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 3. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 99.
.fn-
.fn #
The Pandects (1. <abbr rend=arabic>xlviii</abbr>. <abbr=title>tit.</abbr> <abbr rend=arabic>xviii</abbr>.) contain the sentiments
of the most celebrated civilians on the subject of
torture. They strictly confine it to slaves.
.fn-
.fn #
The Citizens of Athens could not be put to the rack,
unless it was for high treason. The torture was used within
thirty days after condemnation. There was no preparatory
torture. In regard to the Romans, the third and fourth law
<i>de Majestate</i>, by Julius Cæsar, shews that birth, dignity,
and the military profession exempted people from the rack,
except in cases of high treason.—<i>Montesquieu’s Spirit of
Laws</i>, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 132.
.fn-
.fn #
Archadius Charisius is the oldest lawyer quoted in the
Pandects to justify the universal practice of torture in all
cases of treason; but this maxim of tyranny, which is admitted
by Ammianus with the most respectful terror, is
enforced by several laws of the successors of Constantine.—<i>Gibbon’s
Rom. Hist.</i> <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 3. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 81.
.fn-
// File: 122.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art35
<sc>Dr.</sc> JOHNSON’S CONVERSATION WITH THE LATE KING.
.sp 2
In February, 1767, there happened one of the
most remarkable incidents of Johnson’s life,
which gratified his monarchical enthusiasm, and
which he loved to relate with all its circumstances,
when requested by his friends. This was
his being honoured by a private conversation
with his late Majesty, in the Library at the
Queen’s house. He had frequently visited those
splendid rooms, and noble collection of books,
which he used to say was more numerous and curious
than he supposed any person could have
made in the time which the king had employed.
Mr. Barnard the Librarian, took care that he
should have every accommodation that could
contribute to his ease and convenience, while indulging
his literary taste in that place, so that he
had here a very agreeable resource at leisure
hours.

His Majesty having been informed of his
occasional visits, was pleased to signify a desire
that he should be told when Dr. Johnson came
next to the library. Accordingly the next time
that Johnson did come, as soon as he was fairly
engaged with a book, on which, while he sat by
// File: 123.png
.pn +1
the fire he seemed quite intent, Mr. Barnard
stole round to the apartment where the king was,
and, in obedience to his Majesty’s commands,
mentioned that Dr. Johnson was then in the
library. His Majesty said he was at leisure and
would go to him; upon which Mr. Barnard
took one of the candles that stood on the king’s
table, and lighted his Majesty through a suite of
rooms till they came to a private door into the
library, of which his Majesty had the key.
Being entered, Mr. Barnard stepped forward
hastily to Dr. Johnson, who was still in a profound
study, and whispered him, “Sir, here is
the king.” Johnson started up, and stood still.
His Majesty approached him, and at once was
courteously easy.

His Majesty began by observing, that he
understood he came sometimes to the library;
and then mentioned his having heard that the
Doctor had been lately at Oxford, asked him if
he was not fond of going thither. To which
Johnson answered, that he was indeed fond of
going to Oxford sometimes, but was likewise
glad to come back again. The king then asked
him what they were doing at Oxford. Johnson
answered he could not much commend their
diligence, but that in some respects they were
mended, for they had put their press under better
regulations, and were at that time printing
Polybius. He was then asked whether there
// File: 124.png
.pn +1
were better libraries at Oxford or Cambridge;
he answered, he believed the Bodleian was
larger than any they had at Cambridge; at the
same time adding, “I hope whether we have
more books or not than they have at Cambridge,
we shall make as good use of them as they do.”
Being asked whether All-Souls or Christ Church
library was the largest, he answered, “All-Souls
library is the largest we have except the Bodleian.”
“Aye, (said the king) that is the public library.”

His Majesty enquired if he was then writing
any thing, he answered, he was not, for he had
pretty well told the world what he knew, and
must now read to acquire more knowledge. The
king as it should seem with a view to urge him
to rely on his own stores as an original writer,
and to continue his labours, then said, “I do not
think you borrow much from any body.” Johnson
said he thought he had already done his part as a
writer. “I should have thought so too,” said
the king, “if you had not written so well.”—Johnson
observed to me, says Boswell, that “No
man could have paid a handsomer compliment;
and it was fit for a king to pay. It was decisive.”
When asked by another friend at Sir Joshua
Reynolds’s, whether he made any reply to this
high compliment, he answered, “No, Sir.
When the king had said it, it was to be so. It
was not for me to bandy civilities with my
Sovereign.” Perhaps no man who had spent
// File: 125.png
.pn +1
his whole life in courts could have shewn a more
nice and dignified sense of true politeness than
Johnson did in this instance.

“His Majesty having observed to him, that
he supposed he must have read a great deal,
Johnson answered, that he thought more than he
read; that he had read a great deal in the early
part of his life, but having fallen into ill health, he
had not been able to read much compared with
others; for instance he said he had not read
much, compared with Dr. Warburton. Upon
which the king said, that he heard Dr. Warburton
was a man of such general knowledge, that
you could scarce talk with him on any subject on
which he was not qualified to speak, and that his
learning resembled Garrick’s acting in its universality.
The king observed that Pope made
Warburton a bishop; ‘True, Sir,’ said Johnson,
‘but Warburton did more for Pope, he made him
a Christian;’ alluding no doubt, to his ingenious
comments on the ‘Essay on Man.’ His
Majesty then talked of the controversy between
Warburton and Lowth, which he seemed to have
read, and asked Johnson what he thought of it.
Johnson answered, ‘Warburton has most general,
most scholastic learning; Lowth is the more
correct scholar. I do not know which of them
calls names best.’ The king was pleased to
say he was of the same opinion; adding, ‘You
do not think then, Dr. Johnson, that there was
// File: 126.png
.pn +1
much argument in the case.’ Johnson said he
did not think there was. ‘Why, truly,’ said
the king, ‘when once it comes to calling names,
argument is pretty well at an end.’“

His Majesty then asked him what he thought
of Lord Lyttelton’s history, which was just then
published. Johnson said, he thought his style
pretty good, but that he had blamed Henry the
Second rather too much. “Why, said the king,
they seldom do these things by halves.” “No, Sir,
answered Johnson, not to kings.” But fearing
to be misunderstood, he proceeded to explain
himself, and immediately subjoined, “That for
those who spoke worse of kings than they
deserved, he could find no excuse; but that he
could more easily conceive how some might speak
better of them than they deserved, without any
ill intention; for, as kings had much in their
power to give, those who were favoured by them
would frequently, from gratitude, exaggerate
their praises; and as this proceeded from a good
motive, it was certainty excusable, as far as error
could be excusable.”

The king then asked him what he thought of
Dr. Hill. Johnson answered, that he was an
ingenious man, but had no veracity; and immediately
mentioned, as an instance of it, an assertion
of that writer, that he had seen objects
magnified to a much greater degree by using
three or four microscopes at a time than by using
// File: 127.png
.pn +1
one. “Now,” added Johnson, “every one acquainted
with microscopes knows, that the more
of them he looks through, the less the object will
appear.” “Why,” replied the king, “this is
not only telling an untruth, but telling it clumsily;
for, if that be the case, every one who can look
through a microscope will be able to detect
him.”

I now, (said Johnson to his friends, when relating
what had passed) began to consider that
I was depreciating this man in the estimation of
his Sovereign, and thought it was time for me to
say something that might be more favourable.
He added, therefore, that Dr. Hill was, notwithstanding,
a very curious observer; and if he would
have been contented to tell the world no more
than he knew, he might have been a very considerable
man, and needed not to have recourse to
such mean expedients to raise his reputation.

The king then talked of Literary Journals, mentioned
particularly the <i>Journal des Savans</i>, and
asked Johnson if it was well done. Johnson said
it was formerly very well done, and gave some
account of the persons who began it, and carried
it on for some years; enlarging at the same time,
on the nature and use of such works. The king
asked him if it was well done now. Johnson
answered, he had no reason to think that it was.
The king then asked him if there were any other
Literary Journals published in this kingdom,
// File: 128.png
.pn +1
except the Monthly and Critical Reviews; and on
being answered there were no other, his Majesty
asked which of them was the best; Johnson
answered, that the Monthly Review was done with
most care, the Critical upon the best principles;
adding that the authors of the Monthly Review
were enemies to the church. This the king said
he was sorry to hear.

The conversation next turned on the Philosophical
Transactions, when Johnson observed that
they had now a better method of arranging their
materials than formerly. “Aye, said the king,
they are obliged to Dr. Johnson for that”; for
his Majesty had heard and remembered the circumstance,
which Johnson himself had forgot.

His Majesty expressed a desire to have the
literary biography of this country ably executed,
and proposed to Dr. Johnson to undertake it.
Johnson signified his readiness to comply with
his Majesty’s wishes.

During the whole of this interview, Johnson
talked to his Majesty with profound respect, but
still in his firm manly manner, with a sonorous
voice, and never in that subdued tone which is
commonly used at the levee and in the drawing-room.
After the king withdrew, Johnson shewed
himself highly pleased with his Majesty’s conversation,
and gracious behaviour. He said to Mr.
Barnard, “Sir, they may talk of the king as
they will; but he is the finest gentleman I have
// File: 129.png
.pn +1
ever seen.” And he afterwards observed to Mr.
Langton, “Sir, his manners are those of as fine a
gentleman as we may suppose Lewis the fourteenth,
or Charles the second.”
.sp 4
.h2 id=art36
<sc>Dr.</sc> BEATTIE’S CONVERSATION WITH THE LATE KING AND QUEEN.
.sp 2
Dr. Beattie had been informed by Dr.
Majendie, who lived at Kew, and was often at the
palace, that the king having asked some questions
of the doctor respecting him, and being told
that he sometimes visited Dr. Majendie there, his
Majesty had desired to be informed the next time
Dr. Beattie was to be at Kew. What his
Majesty’s intentions were, Dr. Majendie said he
did not know; but supposed the king intended to
admit him to a private audience. A day was
therefore fixed, on which Dr. Beattie was to be
at Dr. Majendie’s house early in the morning, of
which the Doctor was to give notice to his Majesty.
Of this interesting event, so honourable
to Dr. Beattie, I shall transcribe in his own words,
says Sir William Forbes, the account he has given
in his diary:—

“Tuesday, <abbr='twenty-fourth'>24th</abbr> August, (1773) set out for
Dr. Majendie’s at Kew Green. The Doctor
// File: 130.png
.pn +1
told me that he had not seen the king yesterday,
but had left a note in writing, to intimate, that
I was to be at his house to-day; and that one of
the king’s pages had come to him this morning,
to say, ‘that his Majesty would see me a little
after twelve.’ At twelve, the Doctor and I went
to the king’s house at Kew. We had been only
a few minutes in the hall, when the king and
queen came in from an airing; and as they
passed through the hall, the king called to me by
name, and asked how long it was since I came
from town? I answered about an hour. ‘I
shall see you,’ says he, ‘in a little.’ The
Doctor and I waited a considerable time, for the
king was busy, and then we were called into a
large room, furnished as a library, where the king
was walking about, and the queen sitting in a
chair. We were received in the most gracious
manner possible, by both their Majesties.
I had the honour of a conversation with them,
nobody else being present but Dr. Majendie, for
upwards of an hour on a great variety of topics;
in which both the king and queen joined, with a
degree of cheerfulness, affability, and ease, that
was to me surprising, and soon dissipated the
embarrassment which I felt at the beginning of
the conference. They both complimented me in
the highest terms on my ‘Essay,’ which they
said was a book they always kept by them; and
the king said he had one copy of it at Kew, and
// File: 131.png
.pn +1
another in town, and immediately went and
took it down from a shelf. I found it was the
second edition. ‘I never stole a book, but one,’
said his Majesty, ‘and that was your’s (speaking
to me) I stole it from the queen, to give it to
Lord Hertford to read.’ He had heard that the
sale of Hume’s ‘Essays’ had failed, since my
book was published; and I told him what Mr.
Strahan had told me, in regard to that matter.
He had even heard of my being in Edinburgh
last summer, and how Mr. Hume was offended
on the score of my book. He asked many questions
about the second part of the ‘Essay,’ and
when it would be ready for the press. I gave
him, in a short speech, an account of the plan of
it; and said my health was so precarious, I could
not tell when it might be ready, as I had many
books to consult before I could finish it; but,
that if my health were good, I thought I might
bring it to a conclusion in two or three years.
He asked how long I had been in composing my
Essay? praised the caution with which it was
written; and said he did not wonder that it had
employed me five or six years. He asked, about
my Poems. I said there was only one poem of my
own, on which I set any value (meaning the
‘Minstrel’) and that it was first published about
the same time with the ‘Essay.’ My other
poems, I said were incorrect, being but juvenile
pieces, and of little consequence, even in my own
// File: 132.png
.pn +1
opinion. We had much conversation on moral
subjects; from which both their Majesties let
it appear, that they were warm friends to Christianity;
and so little inclined to infidelity, that
they could hardly believe that any thinking man
could really be an Atheist, unless he could bring
himself to believe, that he made himself; a
thought which pleased the king exceedingly;
and he repeated it several times to the queen.
He asked whether any thing had been written
against me. I spoke of the late pamphlet, of
which I gave an account, telling him, that I had
never met with any man who had read it, except
one quaker. This brought on some discourse
about the quakers, whose moderation, and mild
behaviour the king and queen commended.
I was asked many questions about the Scots
Universities: the revenues of the Scots Clergy;
their mode of praying and preaching; the medical
college of Edinburgh; Dr. Gregory, of
whom I gave a particular character, and Dr.
Cullen; the length of our vacation at Aberdeen,
and the closeness of our attendance during the
winter; the number of students that attend my
lectures; my mode of lecturing, whether from
notes, or completely written lectures; about
Mr. Hume, and Dr. Robertson, and Lord Kinnoul,
and the Archbishop of York, &c. &c.

His Majesty asked what I thought of my new
acquaintance, Lord Dartmouth? I said there
// File: 133.png
.pn +1
was something in his air and manner, which I
thought not only agreeable, but enchanting, and
that he seemed to me to be one of the best of men;
a sentiment in which both their Majesties heartily
joined. “They say that Lord Dartmouth is an
enthusiast,” said the king, “but surely he says
nothing on the subject of religion, but what every
Christian may, and ought to say.” He asked
whether I did not think the English language
on the decline at present; I answered in the affirmative;
and the king agreed, and named the
“Spectator” as one of the best standards of the
language. When I told him that the Scots
clergy sometimes prayed a quarter, or even half
an hour at a time, he asked, whether that did not
lead them into repetitions? I said it often did.
“That” said he, “I don’t like in prayers; and
excellent as our liturgy is, I think it somewhat
faulty in that respect.” “Your Majesty knows,”
said I, “that three services are joined in one, in
the ordinary church service, which is one cause
of those repetitions.” “True,” he replied, “and
that circumstance also makes the service too
long.” From this he took occasion to speak of the
composition of the church liturgy; on which he
very justly bestowed the highest commendation.
“Observe,” his Majesty said, “how flat those
occasional prayers are, that are now composed, in
comparison with the old ones.” When I mentioned
the smallness of the church livings in Scotland,
// File: 134.png
.pn +1
he said, “he wondered how men of liberal education
would chuse to become clergymen there,”
and asked, “whether in the remote parts of the
country, the clergy, in general were not very
ignorant?” I answered, no, for that education
was very cheap in Scotland, and that the clergy,
in general, were men of good sense, and competent
learning. He asked whether we had
any good preachers at Aberdeen? I said, yes,
and named Campbell and Gerard, with whose
names, however, I did not find that he was acquainted.
Dr. Majendie mentioned Dr. Oswald’s
“Appeal,” with commendation; I praised it too
and the queen took down the name, with a view
to send for it. I was asked, whether I knew Dr.
Oswald? I answered, I did not; and said that
my book was published before I read his; that
Dr. Oswald was well known to Lord Kinnoul,
who had often proposed to make us acquainted.
We discussed a great many other topics; for the
conversation, as before observed, lasted for upwards
of an hour, without any intermission.
The queen bore a large share in it. Both the
king and her Majesty showed a great deal of
good sense, acuteness, and knowledge, as well as
of good nature and affability. At last, the king
took out his watch (for it was now almost three
o’clock, his hour of dinner) which Dr. Majendie
and I took as a signal to withdraw. We accordingly
bowed to their Majesties, and I addressed
// File: 135.png
.pn +1
the king in these words: “I hope, Sir, your
Majesty will pardon me, if I take this opportunity
to return you my humble and most grateful
acknowledgments for the honour you have been
pleased to confer upon me.” He immediately
answered, “I think I could do no less for a man,
who has done so much service to the cause of
Christianity. I shall always be glad of an
opportunity to show the good opinion I have of
you.” The queen sate all the while, and the
king stood, sometimes walking about a little.
Her Majesty speaks the English language with
surprising elegance, and little or nothing of a
foreign accent. There is something wonderfully
captivating in her manner; so that if she were
only of the rank of a private gentlewoman, one
could not help taking notice of her as one of the
most agreeable women in the world. Her face
is much more pleasing than any of her pictures;
and in the expression of her eyes, and in her
smile, there is something peculiarly engaging.

When the Doctor and I came out, “Pray,”
said I, “how did I behave? Tell me honestly,
for I am not accustomed to conversations of this
kind.” “Why perfectly well,” answered he,
“and just as you ought to do.”—“Are you sure
of that?” said I.—“As sure,” he replied, “as of
my own existence; and you may be assured of
it too, when I tell you, that if there had been any
thing in your manner or conversation, which was
// File: 136.png
.pn +1
not perfectly agreeable, your conference would
have been at an end in eight or ten minutes at
most.” The Doctor afterwards told me that it
was a most uncommon thing for a private man,
and a commoner, to be honoured with so long an
audience. I dined with Dr. and Mrs. Majendie
and their family, and returned to town in the
evening, very much pleased with the occurrences
of the day.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art37
SACRED GARDENS.
.sp 2
The origin of sacred gardens among the
heathen nations may be traced up to the garden
of Eden. The gardens of the Hesperides, of
Adonis, of Flora, were famous among the Greeks
and Romans. “The garden of Flora,” says Mr.
Spence, (Polymetis, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 251) “I take to have
been the Paradise in the Roman Mythology.
The traditions and traces of Paradise among the
ancients must be expected to have grown fainter
and fainter in every transfusion from one people
to another. The Romans probably derived their
notions of it from the Greeks, among whom this
idea seems to have been shadowed out under the
stories of the gardens of Alcinous. In Africa
// File: 137.png
.pn +1
they had the gardens of the Hesperides, and in
the East those of Adonis, or the <i>Horti Adonis</i>,
as Pliny calls them. The term <i>Horti Adonides</i>
was used by the ancients to signify <i>gardens of
pleasure</i>, which answers to the very name of
Paradise, or the garden of Eden, as <i>Horti Adonis</i>
does to the <i>garden of the <sc>Lord</sc></i>.”
.sp 4
.h2 id=art38
SIR THOMAS WYAT. | \[DIED 1541.]
.sp 2
The story of this eminent person, probably
one of the principal ornaments of an age unable
to discern his merits, or unwilling to record them,
has been very imperfectly related. He was born
at Allington Castle, in Kent, the ancient seat of
his family, in 1503, and was the son of Sir
Henry Wyat. He may be said to have finished
his education in the society of that eminent
character Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey, with
whom he travelled abroad, and with whom he
“tasted in Italy,” says Wood, “the sweet and
stately measures of the Italian poesy.” These,
as far as the rude state of our language, and the
still ruder taste of the times, would allow, he
applied to English verse. His poems were
printed at London in 1565, and have since been
// File: 138.png
.pn +1
frequently republished, in conjunction with those
of his noble friend; but here, as in other points
of view, we have but glimpses of him; for
through the ignorance or carelessness of the
original editor, his pieces are so confusedly
blended with the Earl’s, that not many of them
can be positively ascertained.[#]

Having been introduced at Court, where his
endowments both of body and mind, recommended
him to the favour of king Henry the
Eighth, he was employed in several foreign
embassies, which he discharged with great
ability. His influence with the king was proverbial.
// File: 139.png
.pn +1
Lloyd tells us that “when a man was
newly preferred, they said he had been in Sir
Thomas Wyat’s closet.”

We are informed by Wood (<i>Athen. Oxon.</i>)
that Sir Thomas was sent by the king to
Falmouth, for the purpose of conducting a
Spanish Minister from thence to London. Being
desirous of making great expedition, he fatigued
himself so much that he was thrown into a fever,
and was obliged to stop at Sherborne, in Dorsetshire,
where he died a few days after, in the
38th year of his age, “to the great reluctancy,”
says Wood, “of the king, kingdom, his friends,
and all that knew the great worth and virtues of
the person.” He was buried in Sherborne
Church.[#]
// File: 140.png
.pn +1

He left behind him a son of the same name,
who lost his head for exciting a rebellion in the
reign of queen Mary, from whom our poet is
commonly distinguished by the appellation of
Sir Thomas Wyat the elder.

.fn #
There is an engraving of Sir Thomas in the collection of
Holbein Heads, published by Mr. Chamberlaine.

An original picture of him, which has been frequently
copied, is in the collection of the Earl of Romney. It is
nearly a profile, and bears a strong resemblance to Holbein’s
drawing.

There is a print of Sir Thomas Wyat, from an engraving
on wood, after a painting by Holbein; it is the frontispiece
to the book of verses, written on his death, by Leland,
entitled “Næniæ in Mortem Thomæ Viati Equitis incomparabilis,”
an Elegy on the death of Sir Thomas Wyat, <abbr=Knight>Knt.</abbr>
London, 1542, <i>quarto</i>. This book was reprinted by Hearne,
at the beginning of the second volume of Leland’s Itinerary.
Under the head is the following inscription:—

.pm verse-start
“Holbenus nitida pingendi maximus arte,
”Effigiem expressit graphice, sed nullus Apelles
“Exprimet ingenium felix, animumque Viati.”
.pm verse-end

This print has been copied by Michael Burghers and
Mr. Tyson. <i>Granger</i> <abbr=one>i.</abbr> 110.
.fn-
.fn #
The first printed Poetical Miscellany, in the English
language, is the Collection of Poems, edited and published by
Tottel, entitled “Songes and Sonnettes of Surrey, Wyat,
and of uncertain Auctors, London, 1557.”—Another edition,
1565—others in 1574, 1585, 1587. The last edition was
edited by Dr. George Sewell, in 1717.—This Dr. Sewell was a
physician in London; he received his early education at Eton,
which he afterwards completed at Cambridge, where he took
the degree of Bachelor of Physic in 1709. From thence he
went to Leyden, where he studied under the celebrated
Boerhaave. Not being successful in the metropolis, he
removed to Hampstead, where he died on the <abbr=eighth>8th</abbr> of February,
1726. As an author he possessed a considerable share of
genius, and wrote in concert with several of his contemporaries,
particularly in the Spectator and Tatler; he was
principally concerned in the ninth volume of the former, and in
the fifth of the latter, as he was also in a translation of Ovid’s
Metamorphoses, and an edition of Shakespeare’s Poems.
He was the author of a Tragedy, entitled “Sir Walter
Raleigh,” published at London in 1719, and also of another,
which he left unfinished, entitled “King Richard the First,”
the fragments of which were printed in 1728.
.fn-
.sp 4
.h2 id=art39
THE HAND A SYMBOL OF POWER.
.sp 2
In Parkhurst’s Hebrew Lexicon we have the
following remarks on the Hand as an emblem of
strength and power. “The hand was used by
the Jews, as a trophy or monument of victory,
and placed on the top of a pillar. Thus Saul,
after smiting the Amalekites, in the pride of his
heart erected to or for himself (not for Jehovah)
a hand, 1 Samuel <abbr=fifteen>xv.</abbr> 12. And David smote
Hadadezer, king of Zobah, when he was going to
erect his hand or trophy, by the river Euphrates,
2 <abbr=samuel>Sam.</abbr> <abbr=eight>viii.</abbr> 3, and 1 Chronicles, <abbr rend=arabic>xviii.</abbr> 3.—And
this appears to be the most ancient use of these
memorial hands; whence Absalom seems to have
taken the hint of erecting one, merely to keep his
// File: 141.png
.pn +1
name in remembrance, 2 <abbr=samuel>Sam.</abbr> <abbr rend=arabic>xviii.</abbr> 18, where
it may be observed that this monument is expressly
called not only a <i>hand</i>, but <i>a pillar</i>, which
shews that the hand was wont to be put on a
pillar.

“Neibuhr (Voyage in Arabia, tom. 2. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 211.
French edition) speaking of Ali’s mosque at
Mesched Ali, says, that ‘at the top of the dome’
where one generally sees on the Turkish mosques
a crescent, or only a pole, there is here <i>a hand
stretched out</i>, to represent that of Ali.” And
another writer informs us, that at the Alhambra,
or red palace of the Moorish kings in Granada,
“on the key-stone of the outward arch [of the
present principal entrance] is sculptured the
figure of an <i>arm</i>, the symbol of strength and
dominion.”

“It may not be amiss to observe, that to this
day in the East Indies the picture of a <i>hand</i> is
the emblem of power or authority. Thus I am
assured, says Parkhurst, by a gentleman of undoubted
veracity, who resided many years on the
coast of Coromandel, that when the Nabob of
Arcot, who in his time was governor of <i>five provinces</i>,
appeared on public occasions, several
small flags, with each <i>a hand</i> painted upon them,
and one of a large size with <i>five hands</i>, were
solemnly carried before him.”

The hand was used as an ensign of royalty by
the kings of France and England. In Sandford’s
// File: 142.png
.pn +1
Genealogical History, there is the following note
on the counter-seal of king Edward the third:
“In the margin of this counter-seal, near the
point of the king’s sword, is represented the <i>hand
of justice</i>, being an ensign of royalty peculiar only
to the kings of France, for though they in common
with other princes carry in their right hand
a sceptre of gold, yet in the other they bear the
<i>hand of justice</i>, being a short rod, and having on
the top of it a <i>left hand</i>, wide open, made of ivory,
on account of the elephant being the only quadruped
observable for his devotion, love of his
governors, and for his equity. The left hand it
is said, is preferred to the right for this purpose,
because not being employed in working so many
wicked actions as the right, it became more proper
than the other to represent the symbol of
justice. This hand is also placed in the counter-seals
of his successors Richard the second, and
Henry the fourth; king Henry the fifth omitted
it in his seal, and conquering France both placed
that crown on the head, and the French sceptre
and <i>hand of justice</i> in the hands of his son, king
Henry the sixth.”

Queen Elizabeth used the hand as one of her
mint marks.
// File: 143.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art40
HENRIETTA MARIA, | QUEEN OF CHARLES THE FIRST.
.sp 2
“Our royal martyr,” says Dr. Kennet, “by
taking a consort from the Bourbon family, did
apparently bring over some evils and mischiefs
that disturbed his whole reign. For within less
than one year, the French servants of that queen
grew so imperious and insolent, that the king was
forced to discharge them, and to humble them by
a return into their own country.”

“A very sad doom it was certainly to the
French,” says L’Estrange in his annals of king
Charles, “but as the animadversion was extremely
severe, so their offences were in like
degree heinous. The bishop of Mende, the
queen’s almoner, stood charged for putting intolerable
scorn upon, and making religion itself
do penance, by enjoining her Majesty, under the
notion of penance, to go barefoot, to spin, and
to wait upon her family servants at their ordinary
repasts, to walk on foot in the mire on a
rainy morning, from Somerset House to <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr>
James’s; her confessor, mean while, like Lucifer
himself, riding by her in his coach; but, which
is worst of all, to make a progress to Tyburn,
there to present her devotions for the departed
// File: 144.png
.pn +1
souls of the Papists, who had been executed at
that place, on account of the Gunpowder Treason,
and other enormous crimes. A most impious
piaculary, whereof the king said acutely, that
the action can have no greater invective than the
relation. The other sex were accused of crimes
of another nature, whereof Madam <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> George
was, as in dignity of office, so in guilt, the principal;
culpable she was in many particulars, but
her most notorious and unpardonable fault was,
her being an accursed instrument of some unkindness
between the king and queen. These incendiaries
were cashiered, the queen, who formerly
shewed so much waspish protervity, soon fell
into a mode of loving compliance. But though
this renvoy of her Majesty’s servants, imported
domestic peace, yet was it attended with an ill
aspect from France, though our king, studying
to preserve fair correspondence with his brother,
sent the Lord Carleton with instructions to represent
a true account of the action, with all the
motives to it; but his reception was very coarse,
being never admitted to audience. Louis despatched
Monsieur the Marshal de Bassompierre,
as Extraordinary Ambassador to our king, to demand
the restitution of the queen’s domesticks:
which he at last obtained for most of them.”

“It was this match,” adds Dr. Kennet, “that
began to corrupt our nation with French modes
and vanities; which gave occasion to Mr. Prynne
// File: 145.png
.pn +1
to write that severe invective, called Histriomastix,
against stage plays; to betray our
councils to the French court; to weaken the
poor Protestants in France, by rendering ineffectual
the relief of Rochelle; nay, and to lessen
our own trade and navigation. These ill effects,
beyond the king’s intention, raised such a jealousy,
and spread such a damp upon the English subjects,
that it was unhappily turned into one of
the unjust occasions of civil war, which indeed
began more out of hatred to that party, than out
of any disaffection to the king. The people
thought themselves too much under French counsels,
and a French ministry, or else, they could
never have been drawn aside into that great
rebellion. This interest when suspected to prevail,
brought the king into urgent difficulties;
and in the midst of them the aid and assistance,
which that interest offered him, did but the more
effectually weaken him. On this side the water
the French services betrayed him; and on the
other side, the French policies were at work to
betray him.”

And, indeed, as queen Henrietta had a mighty,
if not a supreme sway over King Charles’s councils,
so did her mother, Mary de Medicis, who
came over by her invitation, administer great
cause of jealousy to this nation. “The people,”
says L’Estrange, “were generally malecontent at
her coming, and wished her farther off. For
// File: 146.png
.pn +1
they did not like her train and followers, which
had often been observed to be the sword of
pestilence, so that she was beheld as some meteor
of evil signification. Nor was one of these
calamities thought more the effect of her fortune
than inclination; for her restless and unconstant
spirit was prone to embroil all wheresoever she
came. And besides, as queen Henrietta was
extraordinary active in raising money among the
Roman Catholics of this kingdom, to enable
King Charles to make war against his subjects
of Scotland, so was she extreme busy in fomenting
the unhappy differences between his Majesty
and his English Parliament.”

Sir John Reresby, in his Memoirs, asserts that
queen Henrietta Maria was married after the
king’s death to Lord <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Alban’s. “The abbess
of an English college in Paris, whither the queen
used to retire, would tell me,” says Sir John,
“that Lord Jermyn, since <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Alban’s, had the
queen greatly in awe of him, and indeed it was
obvious that he had great interest with her concerns;
but that he was married to her, or <i>had
children by her, as some have reported</i>, I did not
then believe, <i>though the thing was certainly so</i>.”

Madame Baviere, in her letters, says, “Charles
the First’s widow made a clandestine marriage,
with her <i>Chevalier d’ Honneur</i>, Lord <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Alban’s,
who treated her extremely ill, so that whilst she
had not a faggot to warm herself, he had in his
// File: 147.png
.pn +1
apartment a good fire, and a sumptuous table.
He never gave the queen a kind word, and when
she spoke to him, he used to say, <lang=fr><i>Que me veut
cette femme?</i></lang>”

To what a miserable state the queen was reduced
may be seen in the following extract from
De Retz’s Memoirs, (<abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 261.) “Four or
five days before the king removed from Paris,
I went to visit the queen of England, whom I
found in her daughter’s chamber, who hath been
since Duchess of Orleans. At my coming in she
said, ‘You see I am come to keep Henrietta
company. The poor child could not rise to-day
for want of a fire.’ The truth is, that the cardinal
for six months together had not ordered her
any money towards her pension; that no trades-people
would trust her for any thing; and that
there was not at her lodgings in the Louvre one
single billet. You will do me the justice to suppose
that the princess of England did not keep
her bed the next day for want of a faggot; but
it was not this which the Princess of Conde meant
in her letter. What she spoke about was, that
some days after my visiting the queen of England,
I remembered the condition I had found her in,
and had strongly represented the shame of abandoning
her in that manner, which caused the
Parliament to send 40,000 livres to her Majesty.
Posterity will hardly believe that a Princess of
England, grand-daughter of Henry the Great,
// File: 148.png
.pn +1
hath wanted a faggot in the month of January,
to get out of bed in the Louvre, and in the eyes
of a French court. We read in histories, with
horror, of baseness less monstrous than this; and
the little concern I have met with about it in
most people’s minds, has obliged me to make, I
believe, a thousand times this reflection—that
examples of times past move men beyond comparison
more than those of their own times. We
accustom ourselves to what we see; and I have
sometimes told you, that I doubted whether
Caligula’s horse being made a consul would have
surprized us so much as we imagine.”

As for the relative situations of the king
(Charles <abbr='the second'>II.</abbr>) and Lord Jermyn, (afterwards <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr>
Alban’s) Lord Clarendon (Hist. of the Rebellion,
<abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 3. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 2) says that the “Marquis of Ormond
was compelled to put himself in prison, with
other gentlemen, at a pistole a week for his diet,
and to walk the streets a-foot, which was no
honourable custom in Paris, whilst the Lord
Jermyn kept an excellent table for those who
courted him, and had a coach of his own, and all
other accommodations incident to the most full
fortune; and if the king had the most urgent
occasion for the use but of twenty pistoles, as
sometimes he had, he could not find credit to
borrow it, which he often had experiment of.”

The Lord <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Alban’s above mentioned was
Henry Jermyn, second son of Thomas Jermyn,
// File: 149.png
.pn +1
of Rushbrooke, near Bury <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Edmund’s, in
Suffolk. In 1644 he was created Lord Jermyn,
with limitation of the honour to the heirs male
of his elder brother Thomas. In 1660 he was
further advanced to the dignity of Earl of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr>
Alban’s, and Baron of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Edmund’s Bury,
but on his death in 1683, the earldom became
extinct. The barony of Jermyn devolved on
Thomas (son of his elder brother Thomas) who
became second Lord Jermyn: he died unmarried
in 1703.—Lord <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Alban’s was master of the
horse to Queen Henrietta Maria, and one of the
privy council to Charles the second. In July
1660 he was sent ambassador to the court of
France, and in 1671 was made Lord Chamberlain
of his majesty’s household.—“He was a man
of no great genius,” says Grammont, “he raised
himself a considerable fortune from nothing, and
by losing at play, and keeping a great table,
made it appear greater than it was.” “It is
well known what a table the good man kept at
Paris, while the king his master was starving at
Brussels, and the queen dowager his mistress,
lived not over well in France.”

This earl lived in London at <i>Jermyn house</i>,
which stood at the head of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Alban’s-street,
Pallmall, which street and Jermyn-street had
their names from him.
// File: 150.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art41
LAST MOMENTS OF PHILIP MELANCTHON.[#]
.sp 2
The nineteenth of April, 1560, was the last
day of the mortal existence of this great reformer
and pious christian. After the usual medical
inquiries of the morning, he adverted to the calamitous
state of the church of Christ, but intimated
his hope that the genuine doctrine of the gospel
would ultimately prevail, exclaiming, “If <sc>God</sc>
be for us who can be against us.” After this he
presented fervent supplications to heaven for the
// File: 151.png
.pn +1
welfare of the church, and in the intervals of sleep
conversed principally upon this subject with
several of his visiting friends.

Soon after eight in the morning awaking from
a tranquil sleep, he distinctly, though with a
feeble voice, repeated a form of prayer which he
had written for his own daily use. An interval
of repose having elapsed after repeating this
prayer, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and turning
to his son-in-law, he said, “I have been in
the power of death, but the <sc>Lord</sc> has graciously
delivered me.” This was supposed to refer to
some deep conflicts of mind, as he repeated the
expression to others. When one of the persons
who visited him said, “There is now no condemnation
to them that are in Christ Jesus,”
he soon added, “Christ is made to us wisdom,
righteousness, sanctification, and redemption.”
“Let him that glorieth glory in the <sc>Lord</sc>.”

The coldness of death was now creeping over
him, but his mental faculties continued unimpaired
to the very last breath of mortal existence.
Having expressed a wish to hear some passages
from the Old and New Testaments, his ministerial
attendants read the <abbr='twenty-fourth'>24th</abbr>, <abbr='twenty-fifth'>25th</abbr> and <abbr='twenty-sixth'>26th</abbr> Psalms:
the <abbr='fifty-third'>53d</abbr> chapter of Isaiah; the <abbr=seventh>7th</abbr> chapter of
John, the <abbr=fifth>5th</abbr> of the Romans, and many other
passages. The saying of John respecting the
son of God, he said was perpetually in his mind,
“the world knew him not ... but as many as
// File: 152.png
.pn +1
received him, to them gave he power to become
the sons of <sc>God</sc>, even to them that believe on
his name.”

Upon being asked by his son-in-law if he would
have any thing else, he replied in these emphatic
Words, “<sc>NOTHING ELSE—BUT HEAVEN!</sc>” and
requested that he might not be any further interrupted.
Soon afterwards he made a similar
request, begging those around him, who were
endeavouring with officious kindness to adjust
his clothes, “not to disturb his delightful repose.”
After some time his friends united with the
Minister present in solemn prayer, and several
passages of scripture, in which he was known
always to have expressed peculiar pleasure were
read, such as “Let not your heart be troubled,
ye believe in <sc>God</sc>, believe also in me.”—“In
my Father’s house are many mansions.”—“My
sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they
follow me;” particularly the fifth chapter of
Romans, and the triumphant close of the eighth
chapter, commencing “If <sc>God</sc> be for us, who
can be against us?” Many other parts of scripture
were recited, and the last word he uttered
was the German particle of affirmation, <i>Ia</i>, in
reply to one of his friends, who had inquired if
he understood him while reading. The last
motion which his friends who surrounded him to
the number of at least twenty, could discern, was
a slight motion of the countenance which was
// File: 153.png
.pn +1
peculiar to him when deeply affected with religious
joy!—“Mark the perfect man and behold
the upright, for the end of that man is peace!”

At length, “in the midst of solemn vows and
supplications,” at a quarter before seven, in the
evening, at the age of sixty-three, he gently
breathed his last. No distractions of mind, no
foreboding terrors of conscience agitated this
attractive scene. His chamber was “privileged
beyond the common walks of virtuous life—quite
in the verge of heaven”—and he expired, like a
wave scarcely undulating to the evening zephyr
of an unclouded summer sky. It was a “<sc>DEPARTURE</sc>”—a
“<sc>SLEEP</sc>”—“the earthly house of this
tabernacle was dissolved.”

.fn #
Melancthon was born at Brette, a village of the Palatinate,
on the <abbr=sixteenth>16th</abbr> of February, 1497. In his childhood he
made an astonishing progress in the acquisition of languages.
Luther, and his doctrines, appeared about this time, and
Melancthon stood forward as one of their most strenuous
supporters; indeed the Lutheran system was in a great
measure planned by him, and the famous instrument by
which it was publicly declared, called the Confession of
Augsburg, was the production of his pen. Melancthon was
the intimate friend of Erasmus, and Erasmus the patron of
Holbein. This connection will account for his appearance
in a Collection of Portraits, drawn by Holbein, of the principal
personages in the Court of Henry the Eighth, though
Melancthon never was in this country. An engraving of him is
among the Holbein Heads, published by Mr. Chamberlaine,
and there is a full-length portrait of this great Reformer,
with a fac-simile of his writing, in his Life, published by the
<abbr=Reverend>Rev.</abbr> <abbr rend=spell>F. A.</abbr> Cox, London, 1815, 8vo.
.fn-
.sp 4
.h2 id=art42
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
.sp 2
A considerable number of treatises
were written in the middle and latter end of the
seventeenth century, and a few in the beginning
of the eighteenth, respecting the period at which
the House of Commons asserted that independence
which it is so material to the security and
happiness of the country it should possess, and
obtained that share in the legislature it now
// File: 154.png
.pn +1
enjoys; but the writers on both sides,[#] eager in
the maintenance of the cause they espoused, and
// File: 155.png
.pn +1
taking advantage of the scanty means the public
had of knowing what was contained in the early
Rolls of Parliament[#] and other ancient records,
suppressed from partiality and interested zeal,
much of the information themselves possessed,
which rendered of little use to the public an inquiry
that might otherwise have been attended
with considerable advantage.

It might be supposed indeed, that when men
so remarkable for diligence and learning, as
Prynne and Petyt, (who were both keepers of the
records in the Tower, among which are most of
the Rolls of Parliament, and all the Claus Rolls)
took opposite sides of the controversy, about the
// File: 156.png
.pn +1
time when the Commons first formed a part of
the legislature, whatever could have made for or
against either side of the question would have
been produced. And yet with all their opportunities
and their eagerness for research, those who
have attentively looked through the Rolls of
Parliament, will find amongst them much matter
of importance respecting the questions those
writers discussed at different periods, to which
neither of them referred, either in support of his
own, or in contradiction to his opponent’s argument.
Rymer was equally zealous in supporting
the side he took, in the beginning of the last
century. Any thing therefore having been
brought to light by the publication of the Rolls
of Parliament, which appears to have escaped
the industry and research of such men, is a strong
proof of the utility of printing those valuable
documents.

As early as the <abbr='forty-sixth'>46th</abbr> of Edward the third, a
statute was made, ordaining that all persons
should be entitled to search for, and have exemplifications
of records, as well such as proved
contrary to the interest of the king, as such as
were favourable to it.

Great and eminent men, however, not more
distinguished by their high stations, than for their
talents and research, stated opinions, some on
points of magnitude, in the pursuit of mere legal
investigations, different from those which are
// File: 157.png
.pn +1
probably entertained by such as have carefully
perused the Parliamentary Records, which were
printed during the reign of his late Majesty.

In corroboration of this assertion, it may be
sufficient to mention two opinions of Lord Coke’s.

The first that the Lords and Commons sat
together late in the reign of king Edward the
third[#] and until the Commons had a perpetual
Speaker. The direct contrary of this opinion it
is thought is evident from the Rolls of Parliament.
It does not appear from any Records
that the two Houses ever sat for deliberation in
the same assembly, from the time the Commons
were regularly summoned in their representative
capacity to Parliament.

On the contrary, so early as the <abbr=eighteenth>18th</abbr> of Edward
the first,[#] (Rolls of Par. <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 25, <abbr rend=spell>a.</abbr>
// File: 158.png
.pn +1
the earliest Roll extant) there is a Grant[#] to the
king for the marriage of his eldest daughter, by
several Peers named, <lang=la>“et cæteri Magnates et
Proceres tunc in Parliamento existentes, pro se
et Communitate totius Regni Angliæ quantum
in ipsis est;”</lang> that is, “and other Lords and
Nobles for themselves and the Community of
// File: 159.png
.pn +1
the whole kingdom of England, as much as they
were able.” In the <abbr=nineteenth>19th</abbr> of Edward the second
(<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 351. <abbr rend=spell>a.</abbr>) there is a grant to the king for carrying
on the war with Scotland, by the Citizens,
Burgesses, and Knights for counties, of a
fifteenth of the moveables of the Citizens, Burgesses,
and men of the counties, cities, and
towns.

In the <abbr=fourteenth>14th</abbr> of Edward the second (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 371.)
complaint was made by the Knights, Citizens
and Burgesses of felonies for which they besought
a remedy: and the Record concludes <lang=la>“Et Concordatum
est per Dominum Regem de Consilio
Prelatorum, Comitum, Baronum, et aliorum
Peritorum, in dicto Parliamento existentium
quod,”</lang> &c. that is, “and it was agreed between
our Lord the king and the council of Prelates,
Earls, Barons, and other great men in the
said Parliament assembled, &c.”

The Entries in the sixth of Edward the third,
1331, (to the Parliament Rolls of which year Lord
Coke particularly refers for proof of the Lords and
Commons then sitting together) which appear to
bear on the point in question, are in <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> <abbr=two>ii.</abbr> <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 66.
At the first meeting at Westminster, the Prelates
by themselves, and the Knights for counties by
themselves, deliberated on the business opened
to them at the beginning of the Parliament, and
answered by advising the king not to go in
person to Ireland to quell the rebellion there.
// File: 160.png
.pn +1
And in the third meeting in that year at York,
when a statement was made by Geoffrey le
Scroop, in the presence of the king, and “de
touz les Grantz en plein Parlement,” of all the
Lords in full Parliament; and afterwards it was
agreed by the king and the whole in full Parliament,
that certain Bishops and Peers named,
should meet on the business in discussion by
themselves, the other Prelates, Earls and Barons,
and the Proxies by themselves; and the Knights
of the shire and Commons by themselves. The
business was discussed accordingly during some
days; after which the Commons had leave to
return to their counties, and the Prelates, Earls,
and Barons, were to remain till the day following.

In the <abbr=thirteenth>13th</abbr> of Edward the third (<abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 2.
<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 104.) a grant was made to the king, “par les
Grantz,” of a tenth of the grain of their demesne
lands, and of their fleeces, with certain reservations.
The Commons, however, after representing
their having heard the statement of the king’s
necessities, the extent of which they were aware
of, and were willing to relieve as they had always
done; said, that as the aid must be a great one
they dared not assent to it without consulting
with “les Communes de leur Pais,” the Commons
of their counties. And they desired
another Parliament to be summoned. At which
subsequent meeting, in the same year, (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 107.
<abbr rend=spell>b.</abbr>) the occasion of summoning the Parliament
// File: 161.png
.pn +1
was explained to the Commons, on which they
said they would deliberate. They afterwards
proposed to grant 30,000 sacks of wool on certain
conditions, which if not agreed to by the king,
the aid was to be withheld. The Earls and
Barons the same day granted for themselves and
the Peers of the land who held by Barony, the
tenth sheaf, the tenth fleece, and the tenth lamb.

In the <abbr=fourteenth>14th</abbr> of Edward the third, (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 112, <abbr rend=spell>a.</abbr>)
grants were made by the Prelates, Earls, and
Barons, for themselves and all their tenants,
and by the Knights of shires for themselves, and
for the commons of the land, of the ninth sheaf,
the ninth fleece, and the ninth lamb; and by the
Citizens and Burgesses of a real ninth of their
property; and merchants not inhabiting cities
and towns, and other people who reside in
forests and wastes, and who do not live by their
gains or their flocks, a fifteenth of all their property
according to the true value.

In the <abbr=fifteenth>15th</abbr> of Edward the third (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 127, <abbr rend=spell>a.</abbr>)
on occasion of a Grant made to the king in a
former Parliament, to enable him to purchase
friends and allies for the recovery of his rights,
having not been as available as it ought to have
been, it was proposed that consideration should
be had, “par touz les Grantz et Communes,” “by
all the Lords and Commons,” how the grant
should be made most profitable to the king, and
least burthensome to the people, “les Grantz de
// File: 162.png
.pn +1
par eux, et les Chivalers des Counteez, Citeyens,
et Burgeys de par eux,” that is, “the Lords by
themselves, and the Knights for counties, Citizens
and Burgesses by themselves.”

In the <abbr=seventeenth>17th</abbr> of Edward the third, (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 136, <abbr rend=spell>a.</abbr>) “les
ditz Prelatz et Grantz assemblez en la Chambre
Blanche (the court of requests) responderent,” &c.
(<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 136, 6.) “Et pour vindrent les Chivalers
des Counteez et les Communes et responderent par
Monsieur William Trussell en la dite Chambre
Blanche qi’ en Presence de nostre Signeur le Roi et
les ditz Prelates,” &c. that is, “on which day the
said Prelates and Lords assembled in the <i>Chambre
Blanche</i>, answered,” &c. “And then came the
Knights for counties, and the Commons, and
answered by Monsieur William Trussell in the
said <i>Chambre Blanche</i>, and in the presence of our
Lord the king, and the said Prelates,” &c.

There can be little doubt but that this William
Trussell was Speaker of the House of Commons.
He is styled by Higden, who wrote in the reign
of Edward the third, in his “Polychronicon,”
“Procurator of the Parliament,” when he, in
the name of all the men in the land of England,
renounced allegiance to king Edward the second,
in the last year of that king’s reign.

The Speaker of the Commons was indeed
styled “Parlour and Procurator,” so late as the
first of Henry the fourth. (Rolls of Parl. <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 3.
<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 424, <abbr rend=spell>b.</abbr>)
// File: 163.png
.pn +1

In the <abbr=eighteenth>18th</abbr> of Edward the third, when the
king was going-to France for the recovery of
his rights, the grants by the Lords and Commons
were quite distinct; the former to accompany
him in the war, “les ditz grantz granterent
de passer et lour aventurer ovesque lui;” the
Commons granted, for the same cause, two fifteenths
of the commonalty, and two tenths of the
cities and boroughs. (Rolls of Parl. <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 2.
<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 150, <abbr rend=spell>b.</abbr>)

There are other grants in this reign by the
Commons; <abbr=twentieth>20th</abbr> of Edward the third, (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 159, <abbr rend=spell>b.</abbr>)
and <abbr='twenty-first'>21st</abbr> of Edward the third, (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 166.) In the
<abbr='twenty-second'>22d</abbr> of Edward the third, (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 200.) the Commons
grant an aid, after several days consideration,
but under certain conditions. In the <abbr='twenty-ninth'>29th</abbr>
of Edward the third, (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 265, <abbr rend=spell>b.</abbr>) there is a
separate grant by the Commons.

In the <abbr='fourtieth'>40th</abbr> of Edward the third, after the
occasion of summoning the Parliament had been
explained, the Lords and Commons were directed
to depart, and to meet again on the day following,
the Lords “en la Chambre Blanche,” and
the Commons in the painted Chamber. (<abbr=volume>Vol.</abbr> 2.
<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 289.)

In the <abbr='forty-second'>42d</abbr> of Edward the third (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 227, <abbr rend=spell>a.</abbr>) a
Petition of the Commons, and the answers thereto,
were read in the Court of Requests, in the
presence of the King, Lords, and Commons; and
a statement was made to the king in this Parliament
// File: 164.png
.pn +1
“par les Grantz et Communes,” by the
Lords and Commons, all the former and many
of the latter having dined with the king; after
which John de la Lee was put on his defence
before them in the said place.

In the <abbr=fiftieth>50th</abbr> of Edward the third, (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 283.)
the Commons profess the utmost loyalty and
goodwill to the king; but add, that if he had
faithful ministers about him, he must be rich
enough to do without subsidies, especially considering
the sums of money brought into the
kingdom by the ransoms of the king of France,
the king of Scotland, &c. They then proceed
to the impeachment of a considerable number of
persons.

And in the <abbr='fifty-first'>51st</abbr> of Edward the third, (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 363.)
on the opening of the Parliament, the Commons
were directed by the king to retire to their
ancient place of meeting, in the Chapter House
of the abbey of Westminster. To this record
Lord Coke himself refers.

It will be seen in the note <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 146, that Sir
Thomas Hungerford is mentioned as Speaker of
the House of Commons; and in the first of
Richard the second, that Peter de la Mare was
Speaker of the Commons.

The second opinion of Lord Coke’s to which
allusion has already been made, is, that if an act
mentions only that the king enacts, and the Lords
assent, without naming the Commons, the omission
// File: 165.png
.pn +1
cannot be supplied by any intendment.
Lord Coke expressly says, if an act be penned,
that “the king with the assent of the Lords,” or
“with the assent of the Commons,” it is no act
of Parliament, for three ought to assent to it, the
King, the Lords, and the Commons; or otherwise
it is not an act of Parliament; and by the record
of the act it is expressed which of them gave their
assent; and that excludes all other intendments
that any other gave their assent. (Lord Coke,
<abbr=eighth>8th</abbr> Report, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 20, <abbr rend=spell>b.</abbr>)

How dangerous it would be to decide on the
validity of our statutes, on such ground, will be
seen by a single instance.

The act of the first of Edward the sixth against
exporting horses without a licence, after the recital
in the preamble, runs thus; “For remedy
whereof, be it therefore enacted by our sovereign
lord the king, and by the Commons in this
present Parliament assembled, and by the authority
of the same,”—the Lords being not once
mentioned in the statute, which is accurately
printed from the original act.

Now it appears by the Lords’ Journals, (<abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1.
<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 303, <abbr rend=spell>a,</abbr>) that this act had not only the assent
of the House of Lords, but that it had its origin
in that House, where it passed unanimously,
(<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 306, <abbr rend=spell>a.</abbr>) was returned from the Commons
with a proviso, which was agreed to by the
Lords, (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 312, <abbr rend=spell>a.</abbr>) and is in the Journals among
the acts passed that session. (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 313, <abbr rend=spell>a.</abbr>)
// File: 166.png
.pn +1

There has not been found in the Records, the
slightest foundation for an opinion, that there was
any election of representatives of the Commons
earlier than the <abbr='forty-ninth'>49th</abbr> of Henry the third, 1265,
except in the entry respecting the borough of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr>
Alban’s, so often referred to by different writers.
It is, however, certain that those who held <i>in
capite</i> of the king, were a necessary part of the
great council, as early as king John’s time, when
aids and escuage were to be granted to the
sovereign.

In the <abbr='fifty-second'>52d</abbr> of Henry the third, 1268, a parliament,
or more properly a great council, of Barons
only, was held at Marlborough, where the great
charter was confirmed. The members of this
parliament or council were such of the great
Barons and Tenants <i>in capite</i>, as the king pleased
to summon thereto.

King Edward the first, at Easter, 1276, held
a parliament at Westminster, of Archbishops,
Bishops, Abbots, Priors, Earls, Barons, and
<i>Commons</i>, wherein many excellent laws were
made, called the Statutes of Westminster the first.
It is proper to mention that the <i>Commons</i> here
spoken of, were not Knights of shires, or Burgesses,
but the smaller Tenants who held in chief
of the king, or Tenants <i>in capite</i>.

It is generally said by our Historians, that the
first time that any Citizens, or Burgesses were
summoned to parliament by the king’s authority,
was in the 23d year of king Edward the first,
// File: 167.png
.pn +1
1294, but the editors of the Parliamentary History
(<abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 87,) have shewn that the same king,
in the eleventh year of his reign, 1283, called a
parliament to be holden at Shrewsbury, on occasion
of taking prisoner, David, brother of Llewellyn,
prince of Wales, the latter having lately
been killed in battle.

The king in summoning this Parliament was
more explicit than he had ever been before.
The writs of summons are still extant. The first
is directed to the Barons to meet the king at
Shrewsbury, on the <abbr=thirtieth>30th</abbr> of September. The
second writ is directed to the sheriffs of every
county in England, to cause to be chosen two
Knights for the commonalty of the county, as
also a third directed to the several cities and
boroughs mentioned, and a fourth writ to the
Judges.

Mr. Tyrrell observes, that “neither Prynne
nor Dr. Brady, with all their diligence, have
taken any notice of these writs to summon this
Parliament.

“The writs were directed to all the Earls and
Barons by name, to the number of 110; but the
writs to the cities and boroughs are more remarkable,
especially as they are the first upon record,
requiring the attendance of the Knights of the
shire, Citizens, and Burgesses, except those
issued in the name of the late king Henry the
third.”
// File: 168.png
.pn +1

The cities and boroughs to which these writs
were directed were the following:—Bristol,
Canterbury, Carlisle, Colchester, Chester,
Exeter, Grimsby, Hereford, Lynn, Lincoln,
Newcastle (Tyne,) Norwich, Northampton,
Nottingham, Scarborough, Shrewsbury, Winchester,
Worcester, Yarmouth, (Norfolk) and
York.

In the <abbr='twenty-third'>23d</abbr> of Edward the third, 1294, a Parliament
was summoned to meet at Westminster,
and writs were sent to the several sheriffs of
England to cause to be elected two Knights for
each county, two Citizens for each city, and two
Burgesses for each borough, to be at the said
Parliament, to consent and agree to such things,
as the Earls, Barons, and Peers of the Realm
should ordain; and from this year is to be dated
the first regular general summons of Knights,
Citizens, and Burgesses to Parliament. It is
proper to observe that in this Parliament, the
Earls, Barons, and Knights of the several counties,
sat, treated, and consulted altogether, and
gave the king an eleventh part of all their moveable
goods; the Citizens and Burgesses acted
separately, and granted a seventh part of all their
moveables.

In the more early period of the history of the
House of Commons, when the Parliament frequently
sat only for a single day, the whole
business being to grant the king a subsidy, it is
// File: 169.png
.pn +1
probable that the Speaker might with more propriety
be called the chairman, for sometimes one
of the members was appointed to the chair, and
sometimes another; some resolutions were ordered
to be made by one member, and others to
be reported by another.

In the <abbr=nineteenth>19th</abbr> of Edward the second, 1325,
William Trussell was in the chair, when Hugh
Spenser the younger was accused of Treason, in
Parliament.

In the <abbr=sixth>6th</abbr> of Edward the First, the Commons
made answer to the king by Sir Geoffrey
le Scroop, and it was agreed by the king,
and the whole in full Parliament, that certain
Bishops and Peers named, should meet on
the business in discussion by themselves; the
other Prelates, Earls, and Barons, and the
Proxies[#] by themselves; and the Knights of the
// File: 170.png
.pn +1
shires and Commons by themselves. In the
fifty first of the same king Sir Thomas Hungerfore
was Speaker of the Commons.

In the first of Richard the Second, 1377, Sir
Peter de la Mare, knight of the shire for the
county of Hereford, was Speaker of the Commons,
as he had been in the last Parliament
but one of Edward the Third. In the fifth of
the former king, 1382, Sir Richard Waldegrave
was chosen by the Commons to be their Speaker,
who made an excuse, and desired to be discharged.
He is the first Speaker that appears upon
record to have made an excuse, but the king
commanded him, upon his allegiance, to accept
the office, seeing he had been chosen by the
Commons.

In the fifth of Henry the fourth, 1404, Sir
Arnold Savage being chosen Speaker, after
making an excuse, requested the king, in the
name of the Commons, that they might freely
make complaint of any thing amiss in the government,
// File: 171.png
.pn +1
and that the king would not by the sinister
information of any person take offence at
that of which they should complain, which
petition was granted by the king.

In the seventh year of the same king, 1406,
Sir John Tiptoft being chosen Speaker, made an
excuse on account of his youth, which not being
accepted, he requested that if any writing was
delivered by the Commons, and they should desire
to have it again, to amend or alter any thing
therein, it might be restored to them, which was
granted. Whilst he was Speaker, he signed and
sealed in the name of the Commons the deed
which entailed the crown upon Henry the
fourth. This <i>young</i> Speaker is said to have
taken more upon him, and to have spoken more
boldly and freely to the King and the Lords, than
any before him, insomuch that his example being
followed, the king gave a check to it, when
Thomas Chaucer, <abbr=Esquire>Esq.</abbr> was chosen Speaker in
his room.

In the <abbr=twentieth>20th</abbr> of Henry the sixth, 1450, the
Commons presented Sir John Popham to the
king as their Speaker, who making an excuse, it
was received, and he was discharged, on which
the Commons presented William Tresham, who
had twice before been Speaker, who was accepted.

In the <abbr='thirty-first'>31st</abbr> of the same king, 1453, Thomas
Thorpe, <abbr=Esquire>Esq.</abbr> Speaker of the House of Commons
was arrested in execution at the suit of the
// File: 172.png
.pn +1
Duke of York during the vacation between two
sessions, and the opinion of the judges being demanded
by the Lords, they refused to judge of the
liberties of Parliament as not belonging to their
jurisdiction, whereupon the Lords without their
advice adjudged that the Speaker was not entitled
to any privilege, which, on being-signified to the
Commons, and also the king’s pleasure being
made known to them that they should choose
another Speaker, they chose Sir Thomas Charleton.

In the <abbr=fifteenth>15th</abbr> of Henry the eighth, 1523, Sir
Thomas More, Chancellor of the Duchy of
Lancaster, was chosen Speaker of the House
of Commons. He made the usual protestation
for himself, and prayed that if any member
should in debate speak more largely than he
ought, that he might be pardoned by the king,
which was granted.

In the first year of queen Elizabeth, 1559, Sir
Thomas Gargrave was chosen Speaker; in his
speech to the queen he made four requests,
namely first, free access to her majesty; secondly,
for liberty of speech; thirdly, privilege from
arrests; and fourthly, that his mistakes might
not prejudice the house.

In Scotland the system of representation was
not adopted till the reign of James the first, of
that kingdom, in 1427. By an act of that year
it was enacted, that “the king with consent of the
// File: 173.png
.pn +1
whole council generally has statute and ordained
that the small Barons and free Tenants need not to
come to Parliaments nor general councils, so that
of each sheriffdom there be sent, chosen at the
head court of the sheriffdom, two or more wise
men after the largeness of the sheriffdom, &c.”—Scottish
Acts printed in 1682, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 30.

In Scotland the Lords and Commons unquestionably
sat in the same House till the Union of
the two kingdoms, and the Commissioner who
represented the sovereign, debated with them
from the throne, although he had the power,
which he sometimes used, of adjourning the
assembly when he pleased.

.fn #
Several of these were men remarkable for their talents
and learning: among whom were Petyt, Tyrrel, Sir Robert
Filmer, Dr. Brady, Prynne, Rymer, &c. &c.

Petyt and Prynne were keepers of the Records in the
Tower; and Rymer, who was the king’s Historiographer,
had a warrant not only to search the Records in every office
in the kingdom, but to make copies of such as he should
select for publication. How diligent he was in using this
authority is evident from the invaluable collection of Records,
&c. published by him, and from a large collection of others
in manuscript, now in the Museum.

Petyt makes a direct charge, and not unfounded, against
Prynne, for an intended omission of a reference to the Rolls
of Parliament (<abbr=second>2d</abbr> <abbr=Henry>Hen.</abbr> <abbr='the fifth'>V.</abbr> <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 2. <abbr=number>No.</abbr> 10.) in the Abridgment
of the Rolls made by Sir Robert Cotton, and printed by
Prynne.

Even Sir Robert Atkyns, a man eminently distinguished
for his integrity and learning, as well as for his deep research
into the ancient History of Parliament, who had been a Judge
of the Common Pleas, and was afterwards Chief Baron of
the Exchequer and Speaker of the House of Lords, in his
learned and elaborate argument in the year 1680, in the case
of an information by the Attorney General against Williams,
Speaker of the House of Commons, in asserting the antiquity
of that House, fell into some mistakes, from not having resorted
to the original records. He states, and insists much
on it, that the Speaker of the House of Commons, Sir Thomas
Hungerford, 51 Edward <abbr='the third'>III.</abbr> was Speaker <i>of the Parliament</i>;
whereas the words in the Record are, <lang=fr>“Monsieur
Thomas de Hungerford, Chivaler, q’i avoit les Paroles pur
les Communes d’ Engleterre.”</lang> Rolls of Parl. <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> ii. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 374, <abbr rend=spell>a.</abbr>
In the first of Richard the Second, the Speaker, Sir Robert
says again, was termed the Speaker <i>of the Parliament</i>; the
words in the Record are, “Mons. Pere de la Mare Chivaler
q’avoit les Paroles de Par la Commune.”—<abbr=volume>Vol.</abbr> <abbr=three>iii.</abbr> <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 5, 6.

The same with respect to Sir John Bussey, 20 Richard <abbr='the second'>II.</abbr>
The words in the Record are, <lang=fr>“les Communes presenterent
Mons. John Bussey pour leur Parlour.”</lang>—Page 338, <abbr rend=spell>a.</abbr>—339,
<abbr rend=spell>b.</abbr>
.fn-
.fn #
In 1766, the late Thomas Astle, <abbr=Esquire>Esq.</abbr> was consulted by
the Sub-Committee of the House of Lords, concerning the
printing of the Rolls of Parliament, and in 1768, on the
death of Mr. Blyke, Mr. Astle introduced his father-in-law,
the <abbr=Reverend>Rev.</abbr> Philip Morant, author of the History of Essex, to
succeed that gentleman in preparing the Rolls for the press.
Mr. Morant died in November, 1770, after proceeding in
them as far as the <abbr=sixteenth>16th</abbr> of Henry the fourth, when Mr.
Astle was appointed by the House of Lords to carry on the
work, which he completed in 1775. They are printed in six
volumes, <i>folio</i>.
.fn-
.fn #
Some reliance was placed by his Lordship on the Treatise
<lang=la>“de Modo tenendi Parliamentum;”</lang> the authority of
which, if not entirely destroyed by Prynne, will not at least
in future have much weight.—Prynne’s Animadversions on
4 Inst. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 1. to <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 8. and <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 331.
.fn-
.fn #
In the Parliament of the <abbr=eighteenth>18th</abbr> of Edward the first there
were no Citizens or Burgesses. There is a bundle of writs
yet extant, by which this Parliament was summoned.
They are directed to the sheriffs of several or most of the
counties of England, by which two or three Knights were
directed to be chosen for each county, and accordingly the
counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridge and Huntingdon,
and Cumberland returned each of them <i>three</i> Knights, and the
other counties two each. This Parliament gave the King a
fifteenth of all their moveables as appears by the account of the
same which is entered upon the Great Roll of the <abbr='twenty-third'>23d</abbr> of that
king, in which account we have the style of this Parliament,
namely, “The account of the fifteenth, granted to the king
in his <abbr=eighteenth>18th</abbr> year, by the Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots,
Priors, Earls, Barons, and <i>all others of the kingdom</i>, assessed,
collected, and levied,” &c.

We may here observe that the two or three Knights,
chosen by the several counties, did represent those counties,
and according to the form of the writ, consulted upon and
consented to this grant of a fifteenth.

So also in the <abbr='twenty-second'>22d</abbr> Edward the First there were neither
Citizens nor Burgesses summoned to the Parliament of that
year. On the <abbr=eighth>8th</abbr> of October the king issued writs directed
to every sheriff in England to cause two discreet Knights to be
chosen for each county, with full powers, “so that for defect
of such powers, the business might not remain undone.”
And on the following day the king issued other writs to the
sheriffs to cause to be elected two knights more, to be added
to the former two, making four for each county, and these
four Knights for each county, and the Earls, Barons, and
Great Men, on the day of their meeting gave the king a
tenth part of all their goods.
.fn-
.fn #
This was only a grant of forty shillings for every
Knight’s fee.—See Rolls of Parliament, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 2, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 112, <abbr rend=spell>a.</abbr>
hereinafter referred to in 14 of Edward <abbr=three>III.</abbr>
.fn-
.fn #
Proxies in Parliament is a privilege appropriated to the
Lords only; the first instance of a Proxy that occurs in the
History of the English Parliament, is in the reign of Edward
the first.

In a Parliament at Westminster in the reign of Edward the
second, the bishops of Durham and Carlisle were allowed to
send their Proxies to Parliament.

In the early period of the History of Parliament, the Lords
were not obliged to make Barons only their Proxies as the
custom now is; the Bishops and Parliamentary Abbots
usually gave their letters of proxy to Prebendaries, Parsons,
and Canons; but since the first year of king Henry the
eighth, there appear in the journals no Proxies but such as
were Lords of Parliament.

In the <abbr='thirty-fifth'>35th</abbr> of king Edward the third, 1360, the following
Peeres were summoned by writ to Parliament, to appear
there by their Proxies, namely, Mary, Countess of
Norfolk; Eleanor, Countess of Ormond; Anna, Baroness
Despenser; Philippa, Countess of March; Joanna, Baroness
Fitzwalter; Agneta, Countess of Pembroke; Mary de
<abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Paul, Countess of Pembroke; Margaret, Baroness de
Roos; Matilda, Countess of Oxford; Catherine, Countess
of Athol. These ladies were called <i>ad colloquium et tractatum</i>
by their Proxies.
.fn-
.sp 4
.h2 id=art43
MOSAIC PAINTING.
.sp 2
Mosaic is a representation of painting by
means of small pebbles, or shells of sundry colours,
and, of late years, with pieces of glass coloured
at pleasure; it is an ornament of much beauty,
and lasts for ages, and is mostly used in pavements
and floors.

The term <i>Mosaic</i> is derived from the latin
<lang=la><i>musivum</i></lang>, and ought to be pronounced <i>musaic</i>.
It is odd enough that many persons have really
fancied they could trace the etymology of this
word to the name of the great Jewish legislator.
// File: 174.png
.pn +1
It is well observed by Wotton that Mosaic has
“long life;” and we have much to lament that,
the art was not practised in ancient Rome with
the perfection it has attained in modern Rome.
Had Mosaic been applied to exact imitations of
the pictures of Apelles, Zeuxis, and the great
artists of ancient times, we should still have been
the contemporaries of every fine genius, and a
new polish had renewed their fading beauties,
and restored them to immortal youth.

Pliny has proved that the Greeks first practised
Mosaic, and notices a curious work of the
kind which was called “the unswept piece.”
This singular performance exhibited to the eye,
crumbs of bread and other things which fall from
a table, so naturally imitated, that the eye was
perfectly deceived, and it looked as if the pavement
had never been swept; it was formed of
small shells, painted of different colours.

There were several pieces of Mosaic found in
Herculaneum; one much resembled a Turkey
carpet. The ancients probably gave in Mosaic
some historical subjects, for there was also discovered
the Rape of Europa, composed of small
flints.

Mosaic has been practised in Italy two thousand
years; the manner of working it in that
country is by copying in very small pieces of
marble of different colours, every thing which a
picture can be expected to imitate. Instead of
// File: 175.png
.pn +1
common stones, too difficult to collect for so
great a work, or which would require too much
time to prepare and polish, the Italian artists
sometimes have recourse to paste, that is to a
composition of glass and enamel, which after
passing through a crucible takes a brilliant
colour. All these pieces are inlaid, and very
thin, and their length is proportioned to their
slenderness. They sometimes inlay a piece not
thicker than a hair, and the artist afterwards
arranges these pieces according to the colours
and design of the picture before him. They are
easily fixed in the stucco or plaster of Paris
placed to receive them which soon hardens and
dries. Such works are so solid that they are
capable of resisting the assaults of time through
ages. The Mosaic of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Mark at Venice has
existed above 900 years in perfect splendour and
beauty.

Several fine pieces of Roman Mosaic work
have been discovered in England in the last and
preceding centuries, particularly at Woodchester
in Gloucestershire, and at Horkstow, in Lincolnshire,
both of which have been elaborately described
and engraved by the late Samuel Lysons, <abbr=Esquire>Esq.</abbr>
Others have been found at Winterton, Roxby,
Scampton, and Denton, in the county of Lincoln;
in Yorkshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire,
Northamptonshire, &c. &c.

Sir Christopher Wren intended to have beautified
// File: 176.png
.pn +1
the inside of the Cupola of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Paul’s
Cathedral, instead of painting it in the manner
in which it now appears, with the more durable
ornament of Mosaic work, as is nobly executed in
the Cupola of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Peter’s at Rome. For this
purpose he intended to have procured from
Italy four of the most eminent artists in that
profession; but as this art was a great novelty in
England, and not generally understood, the plan
did not receive the encouragement it deserved.
It was thought also that the expense would prove
too great, and the time very long in the execution;
but though these and all other objections
were fully answered, yet this excellent design
was no further pursued.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art44
KING EGBERT.
.sp 2
It is a generally received opinion, sanctioned
by nearly every modern historian, that Egbert
king of the West Saxons, having dissolved the
Heptarchy, about the year 828, became the first
sole monarch of England. This is, however, one of
those historical points which it is more easy to
assert than to confirm. There were undoubtedly
many chief monarchs of the heptarchy,
both before and after the time of Egbert, that
sovereign himself having been one of those chief
// File: 177.png
.pn +1
monarchs, but some of those petty kingdoms
subsisted for nearly one hundred and twenty
years after Egbert’s death. That this was the
fact is proved both by their coins and their laws.
Several of their coins are still to be found in the
cabinets of the curious. Thus we find that in
the kingdom of the East Angles, king Edmund,
called the Saint, and Ethelstan, (Guthrun the
Danish general being so named by Alfred at
his baptism,) coined money, the first in 857, and
the latter in 878. The kings of Mercia coined
money until <abbr rend=spell>A. D.</abbr> 874, and the kings of Northumberland
till <abbr rend=spell>A. D.</abbr> 950. In the last
mentioned year, the kingdom of Northumberland,
which included all the country north of the
Humber, terminated, and England became one
kingdom. It was again divided by Edwy, who
began to reign in 959, so that Edgar may more
justly be regarded as commencing the series of
kings of all England. It may be proper here to
remark that two kingdoms of the Heptarchy
never coined any money; these were the kingdoms
of the East Saxons and the South Saxons.

Alfred was the first king that made a code of
laws which was common to the whole kingdom.
There were very few legislators among the
Saxon Monarchs. The laws of Ethelbert, who
died in 617, are the most ancient that we have.
The next are those of Lothaire, 673; Edric, 684;
and Wightred, 694; all of them kings of Kent.
// File: 178.png
.pn +1
Ina, king of the West Saxons, 688, and Offa
king of the Mercians, 757, were the only other
kings of the Heptarchy who formed any laws
which have been preserved by historians. If it
be objected that the people of the other kingdoms
could not subsist without laws suited to
the situation of their affairs, we may observe that
the monarchs of those kingdoms received into
their states and adopted the laws of the kings
already mentioned. The laws of Ina were
received by the other kings of the Heptarchy,
and in one of the great councils held by Offa,
king of Mercia, there were present the king of
the East Saxons, the king of the West Saxons,
the king of Kent, the king of Northumberland,
and three kings of Wales.

Alfred having conquered the Danes at Edington,
and Guthrun their general and his principal
officers having been baptized in the church
of Aller, near Langport, in Somersetshire,
Alfred concluded a treaty of peace with Guthrun,
and gave him the kingdoms of East Anglia
and Northumberland for himself and his Danes,
appointing the boundaries of his dominions and
giving him laws which were agreed to and confirmed
by Alfred’s and Guthrun’s nobles. In all
cases which were not provided for by this treaty,
Guthrun consented that the Danes should observe
the general laws of Alfred. This treaty
// File: 179.png
.pn +1
was afterwards confirmed and enlarged by
Edward the Elder, Alfred’s son, with the consent
and approbation of his and Guthrun’s nobles.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art45
THE LATIN LANGUAGE.
.sp 2
So sensible were the Romans of the influence
of language over national manners, that it was
their most serious care to extend, with the progress
of their arms, the use of the latin tongue.
The ancient dialects of Italy, the Sabine, the
Etruscan, and the Venetian, sunk into oblivion;
but the eastern were less docile than the western
provinces to the voice of its victorious preceptors.
This obvious difference marked the two portions
of the empire with a distinction of character,
which, though it was in some degree concealed
during the meridian splendour of prosperity, became
gradually more visible, as the shades of
night descended upon the Roman world. The
western countries were civilized by the same
hands which subdued them. As soon as the
barbarians were reconciled to obedience, their
minds were opened to any new impressions of
knowledge and politeness. The language of
Virgil and Cicero, though with some inevitable
mixture of corruption, was so universally adopted
in Africa, Spain, Gaul, Britain and
// File: 180.png
.pn +1
Pannonia, that the faint traces of the Punic or
Celtic idioms were preserved only in the mountains
or among the peasants. The Celtic was
indeed preserved in the mountains of Wales,
Cornwall, and Armorica; and it may here be
observed that Apuleius reproaches an African
youth, who lived among the populace, with the
use of the Punic, whilst he had almost forgot
Greek, and neither could nor would speak Latin.
The greater part of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Austin’s congregations
were strangers to the Punic. Education and
study insensibly inspired the natives of the countries
just mentioned with the sentiments of
Romans; and Italy gave fashions, as well as
laws, to her latin provincials. They solicited with
more ardour, and obtained with more facility,
the freedom and honours of the state; supported
the national dignity in letters and in arms; and at
length in the person of Trajan, produced an
Emperor whom the Scipios would not have disowned
for their countryman. Spain alone produced
Columella, the Senecas, Lucan, Martial,
and Quinctilian.

The situation of the Greeks was very different
from that of the barbarians. The former had
been long since civilized and corrupted. They
had too much taste to relinquish their language,
and too much vanity to adopt any foreign institutions.
Still preserving the prejudices, after
they had lost the virtues of their ancestors, they
// File: 181.png
.pn +1
affected to despise the unpolished manners of the
Roman conquerors, whilst they were compelled
to respect their superior wisdom and power.
The Greeks seemed to be entirely ignorant that
the Romans had any good writers; and it is
believed that there is not a single Greek critic,
from Dionysius to Libanius, who mentions Virgil
or Horace. Nor was the influence of the
Grecian language and sentiments confined to the
narrow limits of that once celebrated country.
Their empire, by the progress of colonies and
conquests, had been diffused from the Adriatic
to the Euphrates and the Nile. Asia was
covered with Greek cities, and the long reign of
the Macedonian kings, had introduced a silent
revolution into Syria and Egypt. In their
pompous courts, those princes united the
elegance of Athens with the luxury of the East,
and the example of the court was imitated, at an
humble distance, by the higher ranks of their
subjects. Such was the general division of the
Roman empire into the Latin and Greek
languages.

To these we may add a third distinction for
the body of the natives in Syria, and especially
in Egypt. The use of their ancient dialects,
by secluding them from the commerce of mankind,
checked the improvements of those barbarians.
The slothful effeminacy of the former,
exposed them to the contempt; the sullen ferociousness
// File: 182.png
.pn +1
of the latter, excited the aversion of the
conquerors. Those nations had submitted to
the Roman power, but they seldom desired or
deserved the freedom of the city; and it was
remarked, that more than two hundred and
thirty years elapsed after the ruin of the Ptolemys,
before an Egyptian was admitted into the
Senate of Rome, the first instance of which
happened under the reign of Septimius Severus.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art46
Dr. HERSCHEL.
.sp 2
In the History of Doncaster, written by Dr.
Miller, we find the following account of the
early years of this eminent astronomer:—

“It will ever be a gratifying reflection to me,”
says Dr. Miller, “that I was the first person by
whose means this extraordinary genius was drawn
from a state of obscurity. About the year 1760,
as I was dining with the officers of the Durham
militia, at Pontefract, one of them informed me,
that they had a young German in their band, as
a performer on the hautboy, who had been only
a few months in this country, and yet spoke
English almost as well as a native; that exclusively
of the hautboy, he was an excellent performer
on the violin, and if I chose to repair to
another room, he should entertain me with a solo.
// File: 183.png
.pn +1
I did so, and Mr. Herschel executed a solo of
Giordani’s in a manner that surprised me. Afterwards
I took an opportunity to have a little
private conversation with him, and requested to
know if he had engaged himself to the Durham
militia for any long period? he answered, ‘No,
only from month to month.’ Leave them then,
said I, and come and live with me; I am a
single man, and think we shall be happy together;
doubtless your merit will soon entitle
you to a more eligible situation. He consented
to my request, and came to Doncaster. It is
true, at that time, my humble mansion consisted
but of two rooms; however, poor as I was, my
cottage contained a small library of well chosen
books; and it must appear singular, that a young
German, who had been so short a time in England,
should understand even the peculiarities of
our language so well, as to adopt Dean Swift for
his favourite author. I took an early opportunity
of introducing him at Mr. Copley’s concert; and
he presently began

.pm verse-start
“Untwisting all the charms that tie
”The hidden soul of harmony.”
.pm verse-end

For never before had we heard the concertos of
Corelli, Geminiani, and Avison, or the overtures
of Handel, performed more chastely, or more
according to the original intention of the composers,
than by Mr. Herschel. I soon lost my
companion; his fame was presently spread abroad,
// File: 184.png
.pn +1
he had the offer of scholars, and was solicited to
lead the public concerts at Wakefield and Halifax.

“About this time a new organ, for the parish
church of Halifax, was built by Snetzler; which
was opened with an oratorio, by the late well-known
Joah Bates. Mr. Herschel, and six others,
were candidates for the organist’s place. They
drew lots how they were to perform in rotation.
Herschel drew the third lot—the second performer
was Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Wainwright, of
Manchester, whose finger was so rapid, that old
Snetzler, the organ builder, ran about the church
exclaiming:—‘Te tevil, te tevil, he run over te
keys like one cat, he will not give my pipes room
for to shpeak!’ During Mr. Wainwright’s performance,
I was standing in the middle aile
with Herschel;—What chance have you, said I,
to follow this man? He replied, ‘I do not know,
I am sure fingers will not do.’ On which he
ascended the loft, and produced from the organ
such an uncommon fullness, such a volume of
slow, solemn harmony, that I could by no means
account for the effect. After this short extemporary
effusion, he finished with the old hundredth
psalm, which he played better than his opponent.
‘Aye, aye,’ cried old Snetzler, ‘tish is very
goot, very goot inteet; I will luf tish man, for
he gives my pipes room for to shpeak!’ Having
afterwards asked Herschel by what means,
in the beginning of his performance he produced
// File: 185.png
.pn +1
such an uncommon effect? he replied, ‘I told
you fingers would not do,’ and producing two
pieces of lead from his pocket, ‘one of these,’
said he, ‘I placed on the lowest key of the organ,
and the other upon the octave above; thus by
accommodating the harmony, I produced the
effect of four hands instead of two. However,
as my leading the concert on the violin, is their
principal object, they will give me the place in
preference to a better performer on the organ;
but I shall not stay long here, for I have the offer
of a superior situation at Bath, which offer I shall
accept.’“
.sp 4
.h2 id=art47
PARODIES.
.sp 2
The present use of this word is strictly consonant
with that of the ancients, who applied it
to the giving a ridiculous turn to passages in
Homer and the tragic Poets. There are many
in Aristophanes. One of the happiest modern
instances is the parody of the speech of Sarpedon
to Glaucus in the Rape of the Lock. The
genealogy of Agamemnon’s sceptre is also
parodied in the same poem, canto 5, v. 87.
// File: 186.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art48
MOURNING FOR THE DEAD.
.sp 2
In the Mosaic law the Israelites were commanded
<i>not to cut themselves for the dead</i>. The
original Hebrew has, however a more extensive
meaning than cutting, and includes all assaults
on their own persons, arising from immoderate
grief, such as beating the breasts, tearing the
hair, &c. which were commonly practised by
the heathen, who had no hope of a resurrection,
particularly by the Egyptians, which might
afford a particular reason for the Mosaic prohibition.
We may also observe, that among the
Romans, it was ordained by one of the laws of
the twelve tables, “Let not women tear their
faces, or make lamentations at funerals,” which
proves that this was the custom with the
Romans, previously to making this law. No
doubt the law itself was immediately borrowed
from the Athenian code, of which it is a literal
translation.

The Priests of Baal, (1 Kings, <abbr=chapter>ch.</abbr> 18, <abbr=verse>v.</abbr> 28.)
assaulted themselves with knives and lances,
which was indeed equivalent to cutting themselves.
Nor was this frantic custom confined to
the Priests of Baal; the <i>Galli</i>, and other
devotees of the Syrian goddess, cut their arms,
// File: 187.png
.pn +1
and scourged each others backs, according to
Lucian. “Baal’s Priests”, says Dr. Leland,
“were wont to cut and slash themselves with
knives and lances. The same thing was practised
in the worship of Isis, according to Herodotus,
and of Bellona, as Lucan mentions.
Many authors take notice of the solemnities
of Cybele, the mother of the gods, whose priests
in their sacred processions, made hideous noises
and howlings, cutting themselves till the blood
gushed out, as they went along.”
.sp 4
.h2 id=art49
GARRICK.
.sp 2
The genius of Garrick seems to have been
particularly calculated to introduce Shakespeare
on the stage. He knew how to alter him so as
to fit him for the audience of the present day,
without divesting him of any of his excellencies,
and the few additions he has ventured are in the
spirit of the original. These Plays, so altered,
are likely to keep possession of the theatre, while
every other attempt at change or improvement
are forgotten, except Cibber’s Richard the
Third, and Tate’s Lear, which, with some
correction of Garrick’s, are still acted, though
the alteration of the last is directly in opposition
to the precepts of Aristotle and Mr. Addison.
// File: 188.png
.pn +1

Cibber, though versed in the province of the
drama, which is perhaps essential to make a
good dramatic writer, since the knowledge of
stage effect is of great consequence, possessed a
genius not above mediocrity; and Tate was a
very indifferent poet. Yet there is a line in
Cibber’s Richard, written by himself, so characteristic
of the manner of his archetype, that it
has often been cited as one of Shakespeare’s
beauties. I mean the exclamation of Richard,
on Buckingham’s being taken,

.pm verse-start
“Off with his head! so much for Buckingham.”
.pm verse-end

And I heard, says Mr. Pye, (Comment. on
Aristotle,) Mr. Pitt, afterwards Lord Chatham,
quote the following verse of Tate’s, in the House
of Commons, undoubtedly taking it for Shakespeare’s,

.pm verse-start
“Where the gor’d battle bleeds in every vein.”
.pm verse-end

The tragedy of Hamlet was, by order of Mrs.
Garrick, thrown into Garrick’s grave. Though
he was undoubtedly great in that character, he
was equally so in many of Shakespeare’s characters,
and superior in Lear. The comic characters
it is presumed were thought too light for so
solemn an occasion. If by burying that tragedy
with Garrick it was meant to infer that it was
lost to the stage with him, a complete edition of
Shakespeare might, with the utmost propriety
have been interred with that inimitable actor.
// File: 189.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art50
LEMONS.
.sp 2
Theophrastus, who studied under Plato
and Aristotle, says of lemons, that they were cultivated
for their fragrance, not for their taste;
that the peel was laid up with garments, to
preserve them from moths; and that the juice
was administered by physicians medicinally.

Virgil in his second Georgic, describes agreeably
the Lemon-tree. Pliny mentions the lemon-juice
as an antidote; but says that the fruit, from
its austere taste, was not eaten.

Plutarch, who nourished within a generation
of Pliny, witnessed the introduction of lemons at
the Roman tables. Juba, king of Mauritania,
was the first who exhibited them at his dinners.
And Athenæus introduces Democritus as not
wondering that old people made wry mouths at
the taste of lemons; for, adds he, in my grandfather’s
time, they were never set upon the table.
And to this day the Chinese, who grow the fruit,
do not apply it to culinary purposes.

The great use of lemons began with the introduction
of sugar, which is said to have resulted
from the conquest of Sicily, by the Arabs, in the
ninth century. Sestini, in his letters from Sicily
and Turkey, thinks that the best sorts of lemons,
// File: 190.png
.pn +1
and the best sorts of sherbet, were derived from
Florence, by the Sicilians. Probably Rome
continued, even in the dark ages, to be the chief
seat of luxury and refinement; and had domesticated
the art of making lemonade, before either
Messina or Florence.

In Madagascar slices of lemon are boiled, and
eaten with salt.

Pomet, in his History of Drugs, gives the preference
over all others to the lemons of Madeira;
but according to Ferrarius, there grows at the
Cape a sweet lemon, to which he gives the name
<i>incomparabilis</i>.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art51
ORIGIN OF THE POINT OF HONOUR.
.sp 2
We meet with inexplicable enigmas in the
codes of the laws of the barbarians. The law
of the Frisians allowed only about the value of a
farthing, by way of compensation, to a person
who had been beaten with a stick; and yet for
ever such a small wound it allows more. By the
Salic law, if a freeman gave three blows with a
stick to another freeman, he paid about three
halfpence; if he drew blood, he was punished as
if he had wounded him with steel, and he paid
about seven-pence halfpenny; thus the punishment
was proportioned to the greatness of the
// File: 191.png
.pn +1
wound. The law of the Lombards established
different compensations for one, two, three, four
blows, and so on. At present a single blow is
equivalent to a hundred thousand.

The constitution of Charlemagne, inserted in
the law of the Lombards, ordains, that those who
were allowed the trial by combat, should fight
with clubs. Perhaps this was out of regard to
the clergy; or, probably, as the usage of legal
duels gained ground, they wanted to render them
less sanguinary. The capitulary of Louis the
Pious, added to the Salic law in 819, allows the
liberty of chusing to fight either with the sword
or club. In process of time none but bondmen
or slaves fought with the club.

Here may be seen the first rise and formation
of the particular articles of our point of honour.
The accuser began with declaring, in the presence
of the judge, that such a person had
committed such an action, and the accused made
answer that, <i>he lied</i>; upon which the judge gave
orders for the duel. It became then an established
rule, that whenever a person had the lie given
him, it was incumbent on him to fight.

Upon a man’s declaring he would fight, he
could not afterwards depart from his word; if he
did, he was condemned to a penalty. Hence
this rule followed, that whenever a person had
engaged his word, honour forbade him to recal it.

Gentlemen fought one another on horseback,
// File: 192.png
.pn +1
armed at all points; villans fought on foot, and
with clubs.[#] Hence it followed, that the club
was looked upon as the instrument of insults and
affronts,[#] because to strike a man with it, was
treating him like a villan.

No one but villans fought with their faces uncovered;[#]
so that none but they could receive a
blow on the face. Therefore a box on the ear,
became an injury that must be expiated with
blood, because the person who received it, had
been treated as a villan.

The several people of Germany were not less
sensible of the point of honour. The most
// File: 193.png
.pn +1
distant relations took a very considerable share to
themselves in every affront, and on this all their
codes are founded. The law of the Lombards
ordains, that whoever goes attended with servants
to beat a man by surprize, in order to load him
thereby with shame, and to render him ridiculous,
should pay half the compensation, which
he would owe if he had killed him; and if
through the same motive he tied or bound him,
he should pay three fourths of the same compensation.

.fn #
The club was in use at the Norman Conquest, and in
the succeeding ages. <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Louis had a band of Guards
armed with clubs, and was himself very dextrous in the use
of it.

Pennant, in describing the customs of the ancient Bards
and Minstrels of Wales, says, that the lowest of the musical
tribe was the <i>Datceiniad pen pastwn</i>, or he that sung to the
sound of his club, being ignorant of every other kind of
instrument. When he was permitted to be introduced, he
was obliged to stand in the middle of the hall, and sing his
<i>cowydd</i> or <i>awdl</i>, beating time, and playing the symphony
with his <i>pastwn</i> or club; but if there was a professor of
music present, his leave must be first obtained before he presumed
to entertain the company with this species of melody.
Wherever he came he must act as a menial servant to the
bard or minstrel.
.fn-
.fn #
Among the Romans it was not infamous to be beaten
with a stick.
.fn-
.fn #
They had only the club and buckler.
.fn-
.sp 4
.h2 id=art52
GEOFFREY OF MONMOUTH.
.sp 2
Geoffrey of Monmouth was the first
person, after the conquest, who attempted to
write any thing concerning the ancient history of
Britain. Although the century, in which he lived,
is known, yet neither his family, the time of his
birth, nor the place of his education has been
ascertained. We are only informed that he was
born at Monmouth, and became archdeacon of
that place, and that he was consecrated bishop
of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Asaph, in 1152, which he resigned to live
in the monastery of Abingdon. By some writers
he is called a monk of the Dominican order, but,
according to Leland, without sufficient authority.
Warton says that he was a Benedictine monk.
// File: 194.png
.pn +1

The history which has made his name celebrated,
is entitled <i>Chronicon sive Historia Britonum</i>.
This history, written in the British or
Armorican language, was brought into England
by Walter Mapes, otherwise Calenius, archdeacon
of Oxford, a learned man, and a diligent
collector of histories. Travelling through France,
about the year 1100, he procured in Armorica,
this ancient chronicle, and, on his return, communicated
it to Geoffrey, who, according to
Warton, (History of English Poetry,) was an
elegant Latin writer, and admirably skilled in
the British tongue. Geoffrey, at the request and
recommendation of Walter, translated this British
chronicle into Latin, executing the translation
with some degree of purity, and fidelity, insomuch
that Matthew Paris speaking of him with
reference to this history, says that he approved
himself <i>Interpres verus</i>. With whatever fidelity
the translation might be made, Geoffrey, however,
was guilty of several interpolations, for he confesses
that he took some part of his account of
king Arthur’s achievements, from the mouth of
his friend Walter, the archdeacon. He also
owns that the account of Merlin’s prophecies was
not in the Armorican original. The speeches
and letters were his own forgeries, and in the
description of battles, he has not scrupled to
make frequent variations and additions.

Geoffrey dedicated his translation to Robert,
// File: 195.png
.pn +1
Earl of Gloucester, natural son of king Henry
the first; this, however, did not protect him from
the lash even of his contemporaries, for his fables,
it appears, were soon discovered, and William
Neubrigensis, who lived about the same time, in
the beginning of the history which he wrote,
thus speaks of him; “In these days a certain
writer is risen, who has devised many foolish
fictions of the Britons; he is named <i>Geoffrey</i>,
and with what little shame, and great confidence
does he frame his falsehoods.” William himself,
however, did not escape censure for thus animadverting
upon Geoffrey.

It is difficult to ascertain at what period the
original of Geoffrey’s history was compiled.
The subject of it, when divested of its romantic
embellishments, is a deduction of the Welsh
princes, from the Trojan Brutus to Cadwallader,
who reigned in the seventh century; and this
notion of their extraction from the Trojans, had
so infatuated the Welsh, that even so late as the
year 1284, archbishop Peckham, in his injunctions
to the diocese of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Asaph, orders the
people to abstain from giving credit to idle
dreams and visions, a superstition which they
had contracted from their belief in the dream of
their founder Brutus, in the temple of Diana,
concerning his arrival in Britain. The archbishop
very seriously, advises them to boast no more of
their relation to the conquered and fugitive
// File: 196.png
.pn +1
Trojans, but to glory in the victorious cross of
<sc>Christ</sc>.

The Welsh were not singular in being desirous
of tracing their descent from the Trojans, for
several European nations were anciently fond of
being considered as the offspring of that people.
A French historian of the sixth century ascribes
the origin of his countrymen to Francio, a
son of Priam, and so universal was this humour,
and to such an absurd excess of extravagance
was it carried, that under the reign of Justinian,
even the Greeks themselves were ambitious of
being thought to be descended from their ancient
enemies the Trojans. The most rational mode
of accounting for this predilection, is to suppose,
that the revival of Virgil’s Æneid, about the
sixth or seventh century, which represents the
Trojans as the founders of Rome, the capital of
the supreme Pontiff, and a city on various other
accounts in the early ages of christianity, highly
reverenced and distinguished, occasioned an emulation
in many other European nations of claiming
an alliance to the same celebrated original.
In the mean time it is not quite improbable,
that as most of the European nations had become
provinces of the Roman empire, those who
fancied themselves to be of Trojan extraction
might have imbibed this notion, or at least have
acquired a general knowledge of the Trojan
story from their conquerors, more especially the
// File: 197.png
.pn +1
Britons, who continued so long under the Roman
Government.

Geoffrey produces Homer in attestation of a
fact asserted in his history; but in such a manner
as shews that he knew little more than
Homer’s name, and was but imperfectly acquainted
with Homer’s subject. Geoffrey says
that Brutus having ravaged the province of
Aquitaine with fire and sword, came to a place
where the city of Tours now stands, <i>as Homer
testifies</i>.

This fable of the descent of the Britons from
the Trojans was solemnly alleged as an authentic
and undeniable proof in a controversy of
great national importance by king Edward the
first, and his nobility, without the least objection
from the opposite party. It was in the famous
dispute concerning the subjection of the crown
of Scotland to that of England, about the year
1301. The allegations are contained in a letter
to Pope Boniface, signed and sealed by the king
and his lords. This is a curious instance of the
implicit faith with which this tradition continued
to be believed, even in a more enlightened age;
and an evidence that it was equally credited in
Scotland.

As to the story of Brutus in particular,
Geoffrey’s hero, it may be presumed, that his
legend was not contrived, nor the history of his
successors invented, until after the ninth century;
// File: 198.png
.pn +1
for Nennius,[#] who lived about the middle of that
century, not only speaks of Brutus with great
obscurity and inconsistency, but seems totally
// File: 199.png
.pn +1
uninformed as to every circumstance of the
British affairs which preceded Cæsar’s invasion.
There are other proofs that this piece could not
have existed before the ninth century. Alfred’s
Saxon translation of the Mercian law is mentioned;
and Charlemagne’s twelve peers, by an anachronism
not uncommon in romance, are said to be
present at king Arthur’s magnificent coronation,
in the city of Caerleon. It were easy to produce
instances, that Geoffrey’s chronicle was, undoubtedly,
framed after the legend of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Ursula, the
acts of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Lucius, and the historical writings of
Venerable Bede, had procured a considerable
circulation in the neighbouring countries. At
the same time it contains many passages which
incline us to determine, that some parts of it, at
least, were written after or about the eleventh
century.

Warton, (Hist. of Eng. Poetry, Dis. 1.) in
order to prove these positions, says, that he will
not insist on that passage, in which the title of
legate of the apostolic see is attributed to Dubricius,
in the character of the primate of Britain,
as it appears for obvious reasons, to have been
an artful interpolation of Geoffrey, who, it will
be remembered, was an ecclesiastic. Other arguments
present themselves, possessing more efficiency;
Canute’s forest, or Cannock Wood, in
Staffordshire, occurs, and Canute died in the
year 1036.
// File: 200.png
.pn +1

At the ideal coronation of king Arthur, just
mentioned, a tournament is described, as exhibited
in its highest splendour. “Many
knights,” says this Armoric chronicler, “famous
for feats of chivalry, were present, with apparel
and arms of the same colour and fashion. They
formed a species of diversion, in imitation of a
fight on horseback, and the ladies being placed
on the walls of the castles, darted amorous glances
on the combatants. None of these ladies esteemed
any knight worthy of her love, but such as had
given proof of his gallantry, in three several
encounters.” Here is the practice of chivalry,
under the combined ideas of love and military
prowess, as they seem to have subsisted after the
feudal constitution had acquired greater degrees,
not only of stability, but of splendour and refinement.
And, although a species of tournament
was exhibited in France, at the reconciliation of
the sons of Lewis the Feeble, at the close of the
ninth century, and at the beginning of the tenth,
the coronation of the emperor Henry, was solemnized
with martial entertainments, in which many
parties were introduced fighting on horseback,
yet it was long afterwards that these games were
accompanied with the peculiar formalities, and
ceremonious usages here described. In the mean
time, we cannot answer for the innovations of a
translator, in such a description. The burial of
Hengist, the Saxon chief, who is said to have
// File: 201.png
.pn +1
been interred not after the <i>Pagan</i> fashion, as
Geoffrey renders the words of the original, but
after the <i>manner of the Soldans</i>, is partly an argument,
that our romance was composed about
the time of the Crusades. It was not till those
memorable campaigns of mistaken devotion, had
infatuated the western world, that the Soldans, or
sultans of Babylon, of Egypt, of Iconium, and
other eastern kingdoms, became familiar in
Europe. Not that the notion of this piece, being
written so late as the crusades, in the least invalidates
the doctrine here delivered. Not even if
we suppose that Geoffrey was its original composer.
That notion rather tends to confirm, and
establish this system.

On the whole it may be affirmed, that Geoffrey’s
chronicle, which is supposed to contain the ideas
of the Welsh bards, entirely consists of Arabian
inventions. And in this view no difference is
made, whether it was compiled about the tenth
century, at which time, if not before, the Arabians,
from their settlements in Spain, must have communicated
their romantic fables to other parts of
Europe, especially to the French; or whether it
first appeared in the eleventh century, after the
crusades had multiplied these fables to an excessive
degree, and made them universally popular.
And although the general cast of the inventions,
contained in this romance, is alone sufficient to
point out the source from whence they were
// File: 202.png
.pn +1
derived, yet it is thought proper to prove to a
demonstration what is here advanced, by producing
and examining some particular passages.

The books of the Arabians and Persians
abound with extravagant traditions about the
giants Gog and Magog. These they call Jagiouge
and Magiouge; and the Caucasian Wall,
said to be built by Alexander the Great from the
Caspian to the Black Sea, in order to cover the
frontiers of his dominion, and to prevent the incursions
of the Scythians, is called by the orientals
the <sc>Wall of Gog and Magog</sc>. One
of the most formidable giants, according to our
Armorican Romance, who opposed the landing of
Brutus in Britain, was Goemagot. He was twelve
cubits high, and would uproot an oak as easily as
a hazel wand; but after a most obstinate encounter
with Corinæus, he was tumbled into the
sea from the summit of a steep cliff on the rocky
shores of Cornwall, and dashed in pieces against
the huge crags of the declivity. The place
where he fell, adds our historian, taking its name
from the giants fall, is called <sc>Sam Goemagot</sc>,
or <sc>Goemagot’s leap</sc> to this day. A no less
monstrous giant, whom king Arthur slew on
<abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Michael’s mount in Cornwall, is said by this
fabler to have come from Spain. Here the
origin of these stories is evidently betrayed.
The Arabians, or Saracens, as has been before
hinted, had conquered Spain, and were settled
// File: 203.png
.pn +1
there. Arthur having killed this redoubted
giant, declares, that he had combated with none
of equal strength and prowess, since he overcame
the mighty giant, Rytho, on the mountain
Arabius, who had made himself a robe of the
beards of the kings whom he had killed. A
magician brought from Spain is called to the
assistance of Edwin a prince of Northumberland,
educated under Solomon king of the Armoricans.
In the prophecy of Merlin, delivered to Vortigern,
after the battle of the Dragons, forged perhaps
by the translator Geoffrey, yet apparently in the
spirit and manner of the rest, we have the
Arabians named, and their situations in Spain
and Africa. “From Conan shall come forth a
wild boar, whose tusks shall destroy the oaks of
the forests of France. The <sc>Arabians</sc> and
<sc>Africans</sc> shall dread him; and he shall continue
his rapid course into the most distant parts
of Spain.” This is king Arthur. In the same
prophecy, mention is made of the “Woods of
Africa.” In another place Gormund, king of
the Africans occurs. In a battle which Arthur
fights against the Romans, some of the principal
leaders in the Roman army are Alifantinam,
king of Spain; Pandrasus, king of Egypt;
Broccus, king of the Medes; Evander, king of
Syria; Micipsa, king of Babylon; and a Duke
of Phrygia.

The old fictions about Stonehenge were
// File: 204.png
.pn +1
derived from the same inexhaustible source of
extravagant imagination. We are told in this
Romance, that the giants conveyed the stones
which compose this miraculous monument from
the farthest coasts of Africa. Every one of these
stones is supposed to be mystical, and to maintain
a medicinal virtue; an idea drawn from the
medical skill of the Arabians, and more particularly
from the Arabian doctrine of attributing
healing qualities, and other occult properties to
stones. Merlin’s transformation of Uther into
Gorlois, and of Ulfin into Bricel, by the power
of some medical preparation is a species of
Arabian magic, which professed to work the
most wonderful deceptions of this kind. The
attributing of prophetical language to birds was
common among the Orientals, and an eagle is
supposed to speak at building the walls of the
city of Paladur, now Shaftesbury.

The Arabians cultivated the study of Philosophy,
particularly Astronomy, with amazing
ardour. Hence arose the tradition, reported by
our historian, that in king Arthur’s reign, there
subsisted at Carleon in Glamorganshire, a
college of two hundred philosophers, who studied
astronomy and other sciences; and who were
particularly employed in watching the courses
of the stars, and predicting events to the king
from their observations. Edwin’s Spanish
magician above mentioned, by his knowledge of
// File: 205.png
.pn +1
the flight of birds, and the courses of the stars,
is said to fortel future disasters. In the same
strain, Merlin prognosticates Uther’s success in
battle by the appearance of a comet. The same
Enchanter’s <i>wonderful skill in mechanical powers</i>,
by which he removes the Giant’s Dance, or
Stonehenge, from Ireland into England, and the
notion that this stupendous structure was raised
by a <sc>PROFOUND PHILOSOPHICAL KNOWLEDGE
OF THE MECHANICAL ARTS</sc>, are
founded on the Arabian literature. To which
we may add king Bladud’s magical operations.
Dragons are a sure mark of orientalism. One
of these in our Romance is a “terrible dragon
flying from the west, breathing fire, and illuminating
all the country with the brightness of
his eyes.” In another place we have a giant
mounted on a winged dragon; the dragon erects
his scaly tail, and wafts his rider to the clouds
with great rapidity.

Arthur and Charlemagne are the first and
original heroes of Romance. And as Geoffrey’s
history is the grand repository of the acts of
Arthur, so a fabulous history ascribed to Turpin
is the ground work of all the chimerical legends
which have been related concerning the conquests
of Charlemagne and his twelve Peers.
In these two fabulous chronicles the foundations
of romance seem to be laid. The principal
characters, the leading subjects, and the fundamental
// File: 206.png
.pn +1
fictions which have supplied such ample
matter to this singular species of composition,
are here first displayed. And although the long
continuance of the Crusades imported innumerable
inventions of a similar complexion, and
substituted the achievements of new champions,
and the wonders of other countries, yet the tales
of Arthur and Charlemagne, diversified indeed,
or enlarged with additional embellishments, still
continued to prevail, and to be the favourite
topics; and this, partly from their early popularity,
partly from the quantity and the beauty
of the fictions with which they were at first supported,
and especially because the design of the
Crusades had made those subjects so fashionable
in which Christians fought with Infidels. In a
word these volumes are the first specimens extant
in this mode of writing. No European history
before these has mentioned giants, enchanters,
dragons, and the like monstrous and arbitrary
fictions. And the reason is obvious; they were
written at a time when a new and unnatural
mode of thinking took place in Europe, introduced
by our communication with the East.

Geoffrey, in his chronicle, gives a genealogy
of the kings of Britain, from the days of Brutus,
including a list of seventy monarchs, who
governed this island, previously to the invasion
of Julius Cæsar. This list is very distinct and
plain, but bears so many marks of invention,
// File: 207.png
.pn +1
either of himself, or of the author, from whom he
translated his chronicle, that it has long since
been treated as a mere fiction. With respect to
the story of Brutus, the bishop of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Asaph is
of opinion, that this forgery was intended to pass
off the English kings, as being as nobly descended
as the kings of other nations, by drawing their
descent from the Trojans, according to the belief
of the age in which the author lived. Sir
William Temple, in his introduction to the
History of England, (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 19.) accounts the story
of Brutus, as a fabulous invention.

Bishop Nicolson (Hist. Libr. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 37.) says,
that the best defence that can be made for
Geoffrey’s history, is that which was written by
Sir John Price, and published at London, in
quarto, in 1573, under the title of <i>Historiæ
Britannicæ Defensio</i>. This was dedicated by the
author, to Lord Burleigh. (See Herbert’s
Ames, <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 2. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 935, 1056.)

The chronicle of Geoffrey of Monmouth, has
occasioned a long controversy, and divided the
learned world as much as any other work given
to the public. By some it has been treated as a
forgery imposed upon the world by Geoffrey
himself, whilst by others the ground work is considered
as true, although the history, like most
monkish writings, is mixed with childish fables
and legendary tales.

The controversy has now been some time
// File: 208.png
.pn +1
finally decided, and the best Welsh critics allow
that Geoffrey’s work was a vitiated translation
of the history of the British kings, written by
Tyssilio, or <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Telian, bishop of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Asaph,
who flourished in the seventh century. Geoffrey
in his work omitted many parts, made considerable
alterations, additions, and interpolations,
latinised many of the British appellations, and in
the opinion of a learned Welshman,[#] (Lewis
Morris) metaphorically murdered Tyssillio. We
may therefore conclude that Geoffrey ought
not to be cited as historical authority any more
than Amadis de Gaul, or the Seven Champions of
Christendom.

Geoffrey’s historical Romance, however, has
not only been versified by monkish writers, but
has supplied some of our best poets with materials
for their sublime compositions. Spenser in
the second book of his “Fairie Queene” has
given

.pm verse-start
“A Chronicle of Briton kings
”From Brute to Arthur’s rayne;“
.pm verse-end

in which he has adorned the genealogy with
poetical images, and introduces it with a sublime
address to queen Elizabeth, who was proud of
tracing her descent from the British line.

In this historical romance is also to be found,
the affecting history of Leir, king of Britain, the
eleventh in succession after Brutus, who divided
// File: 209.png
.pn +1
his kingdom between Goneriller and Regan, his
two elder daughters, and disinherited his younger
daughter, Cordeilla. Being ungratefully treated
by his elder daughters, he was restored to the
crown by Cordeilla, who espoused Aganippus,
king of the Franks. From this account Shakespeare
selected his incomparable tragedy of king
Lear; but improved the pathos by making the
death of Cordeilla, which name he softened after
the example of Spenser into Cordelia, precede
that of Lear, whilst in the original story, the
aged father is restored to his kingdom, and survived
by Cordeilla.

Milton seems to have been particularly fond of
Geoffrey’s tales,[#] to which he was indebted for
the beautiful fiction of Sabrina in the mask of
Comus. In his youth he even formed the design
// File: 210.png
.pn +1
of making the early period of the British history,
from Brutus to Arthur, the subject of an Epic
Poem. The poetical language of Milton was
peculiarly suited to this species of romance; he
would have exalted the legends of Geoffrey, and
enriched with the finest imagery the incantations
and prophecies of Merlin, the heroic deeds
of Vortimer, Aurelius, and Uther Pendragon.

The fables of Geoffrey have been clothed in
rhyme by Robert of Gloucester, a monk of the
abbey of Gloucester. He has left a poem of
considerable length, which is a history of England
in verse, from Brutus to the reign of
Edward the first. His rhyming chronicle is,
however, destitute either of art or imagination,
and Geoffrey’s prose, frequently has a more
poetical air than this author’s verses. It was
evidently written after the year 1278, as the poet
mentions king Arthur’s sumptuous tomb, erected
in that year, before the high altar of Glastonbury
abbey, and he declares himself a living
witness of the remarkably dismal weather which
distinguished the day on which the battle of
Evesham was fought in the year 1265. From
these and other circumstances this piece appears
to have been composed about the year 1280. It
is full of Saxonisms, which indeed abound more
or less, in every writer before Gower and
Chaucer.

Geoffrey was also copied by an old French
// File: 211.png
.pn +1
poet, called Maister Wace, or Gasse, from which
Robert de Brunne in his metrical chronicle of
England translated that part which extends from
Æneas to the death of Cadwallader. Wace’s
poem is commonly called Roman de Rois
d’Angleterre, and is esteemed one of the oldest
of the French Romances.

With respect to the materials this chronicle
has afforded to other writers, I will here give an
instance or two.

Tyrrel, in his history of England, acknowledges
that his first book is an epitome of
Geoffrey’s pretended history; but at the same
time says that if it had not been more for the diversion
of the younger sort of readers, and that the
work would have been thought to be imperfect
without it, he should have been much better
satisfied in wholly omitting it.

In the preface to Stow’s chronicle, (folio, 1631)
the editor observes that Neubrigensis had written
several invectives against Geoffrey, but more out
of spleen than judgment. He charges that writer
with maliciously endeavouring to destroy the
credit of Geoffrey, because he himself having
been a supplicant for the bishoprick of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Asaph,
had been rejected by the Prince of Wales, and
had thus become the opponent of the Welsh history.
His observations, Stow says, have been
confuted by Sir John Price, Dr. Powel, and
also by Lambard, in his perambulations of Kent.
// File: 212.png
.pn +1
Stow then mentions John of Whethamsted,
Polydore Virgil, and others, who have written
against Geoffrey, and afterwards enumerates a
long list of writers, as having uniformly supported
him, or in other words, who have copied his
history into their own chronicles.—Hume occasionally
refers to Geoffrey, as an authority for
some matters respecting the Saxon period of
his history.

The History of Geoffrey was printed at Paris,
in quarto, in 1508, and again in the same size,
by Ascensius, in 1517. It was also printed with
five other British historians, in folio, at Leyden,
in 1587. Ponticus Virunnius, an Italian author,
made an abridgment of it, in six books, which
was printed at London, by Powel, in 1585, and
also in the edition just mentioned.

A translation of Geoffrey’s chronicle was made
by Aaron Thompson, and published at London
in 1718, to which was prefixed a long preface,
relating to the authority of the history. Thompson’s
vindication of his author is elaborately
written, and he defends him with great skill and
learning; but after refuting the charge of forgery,
he has failed in his attempt to establish Geoffrey’s
work as an historical performance, for he himself
invalidates its authority, by acknowledging
that it was only such an irregular account, as
the Britons were able to preserve in those times
of destruction and confusion, with the addition
// File: 213.png
.pn +1
of some romantic tales, which indeed might be
traditions among the Welsh, and such as Geoffrey
might think entertaining stories for the credulity
of the times.

Thompson, in his preface, says that in making
his translation, he used two editions of Geoffrey.
The first was the Paris edition of Ascensius, 1517,
which abounds with abbreviations of words,
sometimes rendering their reading ambiguous.
The other was the edition of Commeline, printed
in the year 1587, which is much the most correct.
These two were printed from different manuscripts,
and there is a considerable variation
between them, especially in the orthography of
persons and places. This observation extends to
the several ancient abridgments of Geoffrey, by
Alfred of Beverley, Ralph Diceto, Matthew of
Westminster, Ralph Higden, and Ponticus
Virunnius.

.fn #
Nennius lived in the ninth century, and is said to have
left behind him several treatises, of which all that has been
published is the history, which was printed for the first time
in Dr. Gale’s Collection of British Historians, published at
Oxford in 1687 and 1691, in 2 <abbr=volumes>vols.</abbr> folio. Leland mentions
an ancient copy of Nennius’s history, which he says he borrowed
from Thomas Solme, Secretary for the French
language to king Henry the eighth, in the margin of which
were the additions of <i>Sam. Beaulanius</i>, or <i>Britannus</i>. He
has transcribed several of these marginal annotations, which
as it appears, were afterwards inserted in the body of the
history, and were printed in that manner by Dr. Gale.
The Doctor in his notes, mentions Beaulanius as the Scholiast
on the copy which he used, but Leland has a great many
other things, as extracts out of Beaulanius, which Dr. Gale
does not mention to be only in the Scholion. There is also
in the Bodleian Library a manuscript of Nennius apparently
nearly 600 years old, in which the prefaces and all the
interpolations, which Leland says are by Beaulanius, are
wanting.

Professor Bertram, of Copenhagen, published in the year
1757, “Britannicarum gentium Historiæ Antiquæ Scriptores
tres; Ricardus Corinensis, Gildas Badonicus, Nennius
Banchorensis: recensuit, notisque et indice auxit Carolus
Bertramus, S. A. Lond. Soc. &c. Havniæ, 1757.” 8vo.
The Professor followed Dr. Gale’s edition of Gildas and
Nennius, but in the latter he has distinguished the interpolations
of Beaulanius from the genuine text. Mr. Gough,
(Brit. Topogr. <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 1. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 15.) mentions Mr. Evan Evans
having been long preparing a new edition of Nennius, from
the Bodleian and other manuscripts.
.fn-
.fn #
Cambrian Register, 1795, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 947.
.fn-
.fn #
In 1670, Milton published his History of England,
comprising the whole fable of Geoffrey, and continued to
the Norman Invasion. Why he should have given the first
part, which he seems not to have believed, and which is
universally rejected, it is difficult to conjecture. The style
is harsh, but it has something of rough vigour, which perhaps
may often strike, though it cannot please. On this
history, the licenser fixed his claws, and before he would
transmit it to the press, tore out several parts. Some censures
of the Saxon Monks were taken away, lest they should be
applied to the modern Clergy; and a character of the Long
Parliament and Assembly of Divines, was excluded; of
which the Author gave a copy to the Earl of Anglesea, and
which being afterwards published, has been since inserted in
its proper place.—<i>Johnson’s Lives of the Poets, Art. Milton.</i>
.fn-
.sp 4
.h2 id=art54
LIFTING UP THE HAND IN SWEARING.
.sp 2
We find this significant ceremony of lifting up
the hand in swearing, practised by the Greeks
and Trojans. Thus Agamemnon swears in
Homer, (Iliad, 7, 412)

.pm verse-start
“To all the gods his sceptre he uplifts.”
.pm verse-end

// File: 214.png
.pn +1
And Dolon requiring an oath of Hector, (Iliad,
10, 321)

.pm verse-start
“But first exalt thy sceptre to the skies,
”And swear——“
.pm verse-end

So in Virgil, (Æn. 12, 196) we find Latinus,
when swearing, looking up to heaven, and
stretching his right hand to the stars.

And we even meet with traditionary traces of
their gods swearing in like manner. Thus
Apollo, in Pindar, orders Lachesis, one of the
Fates, to lift up her hands and not violate the
great oath of the gods.

Giving one’s hand <i>under</i>, or to another was
a token of submission. It was acknowledging
his own power subject to that of the other. In
this manner all the princes submitted to Solomon,
(1 Chron. 29, 24) and Hezekiah commands
the children of Israel, (2 Chron. 30, 8) to give
the hand to <sc>Jehovah</sc>, that is to submit themselves
and ascribe the power and the glory to him.

Homage is still performed in many places by
the homager’s kneeling down and putting his
hands between those of his lord, then taking an
oath of fealty to him; after which they kiss each
other’s cheek, in token of friendship and fidelity.

Giving the hand, was also a token of promising;
it was a kind of staking their active powers
for the performance of some promise or engagement.
(See Ezra, 10, 19.)

The joining or taking of hands, among the
// File: 215.png
.pn +1
ancients, betokened confederacy, or confirmation
of some promise. This is illustrated by Homer’s
expression, (Iliad, 21, 286) where Neptune and
Minerva appear to Achilles, in a human shape,
and confirm their promise, by taking his hand in
their’s. So (Iliad, 6, 233) Glaucus and Diomed
took hold of each other’s hands, and plighted
their faith. On which line, Eustathius remarks,
they plighted their faith to each other, by the
accustomed ceremony of joining their right
hands.[#]

We observe the same mode of joining hands in
our marriage ceremony; and the custom of shaking
hands, has also reference to some engagement
for the future, as well as being a token of friendship
and amity.

.fn #
Parkhurst’s Heb. Lex. 271.
.fn-
.sp 4
.h2 id=art55
VILLIERS, DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
.sp 2
A treaty of marriage between Charles,
prince of Wales, (afterwards Charles <abbr=one>I.</abbr>) and
the Infanta of Spain, having been a long time
in agitation, Buckingham, in 1623, persuaded
Prince Charles to make a journey into Spain,
and to fetch home his mistress, the Infanta, by
representing to him, how brave and gallant an
action it would be, and how soon it would put
// File: 216.png
.pn +1
an end to those formalities, which, though all
substantial matters were already agreed upon,
might yet retard her voyage to England many
months. It is suggested by Lord Clarendon,
that Buckingham’s motive for this journey, was
an unwillingness that the Earl of Bristol, the
ambassador in Spain, should have the sole honour
of concluding the treaty of marriage. However,
the king was vehemently against this
journey, and indeed with good reason; but the
solicitations of the prince, and the impetuosity
of Buckingham, prevailed.

It appears that Buckingham, during his stay
in Spain, behaved with great insolence to the
Earl of Bristol, the English ambassador at that
court. In a letter, written by the Earl to king
James, we have the following particulars:—“Let
your Majesty call some certain men unto
you, and sift out of them the opinion of the more
moderate parliament-men; and enquire of those
that come out of Spain, who did give the first
cause of falling out? Whether the Duke of
Buckingham did not many things against the
authority and reverence due to the Prince?
Whether he was not wont to be sitting, whilst
the Prince stood, and was in presence; and also
to have his feet resting upon another seat, after
an indecent manner? Whether, when the Prince
was uncovered whilst the Queen and Infanta
looked out at the window, he uncovered his head
// File: 217.png
.pn +1
or not? Whether, sitting; at table with the
prince, he did not behave himself unreverently?
Whether he were not wont to come into the
prince’s chamber, with his clothes half on, so
that the doors could not be opened to them that
came to visit the prince from the king of Spain,
the door-keepers refusing to go in for modesty
sake? Whether he did not call the prince by
ridiculous names? Whether he did not dishonour
and profane the king’s palace with base and contemptible
women? Whether he did not divers
obscene things, and used not immodest gesticulations,
and wanton tricks with players in the
presence of the prince? Whether he did not
violate his faith to the Duke d’Olivarez, the
Spanish prime minister? Whether he did not
presently communicate his discontents, offences,
and complaints, to the ambassadors of other
princes? Whether in doing of his business, he did
not use frequent threatenings unto the catholic
king’s ministers, and to apostolical nuncios?
Whether he did not affect to sit at plays presented
in the king’s palace, after the manner and example
of the king and prince, being not contented
with the honour that is ordinarily given to the
high steward or major-domo of the king’s
house?”

There is sufficient reason for believing, that
most of these queries may be answered in the
affirmative.
// File: 218.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art56
KING ARTHUR.
.sp 2
In a century (<abbr rend=spell>A.D.</abbr> 400 to <abbr rend=spell>A.D.</abbr> 500) of
perpetual, or at least implacable war, much
courage, and some skill, must have been exerted
for the defence of Britain, on the departure of
the Roman legions, against the Saxon invaders.
Yet if the memory of its champions is almost
buried in oblivion, we need not repine; since
every age, however destitute of science or virtue,
sufficiently abounds with acts of blood and military
renown. The tomb of Vortimer, the son of
Vortigern, was erected on the margin of the sea-shore,
as a landmark formidable to the Saxons,
whom he had thrice vanquished in the fields of
Kent. Ambrosius Aurelian was descended from
a noble family of Romans, his modesty was equal
to his valour, and his valour, till the last fatal
action, was crowned with splendid success. But
every British name is effaced by the illustrious
name of <sc>Arthur</sc>, the hereditary prince of the
Silures, who inhabited South Wales, and the
elective king or general of the nation. According
to the most rational accounts, he defeated, in
twelve successive battles, the Angles of the
North, and the Saxons of the West; but the
declining age of the hero was embittered by
// File: 219.png
.pn +1
popular ingratitude and domestic misfortunes.
The events of his life are less interesting, than
the singular revolutions of his fame. During a
period of five hundred years the tradition of his
exploits was preserved, and rudely embellished,
by the obscure bards of Wales and Armorica,
who were odious to the Saxons, and unknown
to the rest of mankind. The pride and curiosity
of the Norman conquerors, prompted them to
enquire into the ancient history of Britain; they
listened with fond credulity to the tale of Arthur,
and eagerly applauded the merit of a prince, who
had triumphed over the Saxons, their common
enemies. His romance, transcribed in the latin
of Geoffrey of Monmouth, and afterwards translated
into the fashionable idiom of the times, was
enriched with the various, though incoherent
ornaments, which were familiar to the experience,
the learning, or the fancy of the twelfth century.
The progress of a Phrygian colony from the
Tyber to the Thames, was easily engrafted on
the fable of the Æneid; and the royal ancestors
of Arthur derived their origin from Troy, and
claimed their alliance with the Cæsars, His
trophies were decorated with captive provinces
and imperial titles; and his Danish victories
avenged the recent injuries of his country. The
gallantry and superstition of the British hero,
his feasts and tournaments, and the memorable
institution of his knights of the <i>round table</i>, were
// File: 220.png
.pn +1
faithfully copied from the reigning manners of
chivalry, and the fabulous exploits of Uther’s
son, appear less incredible than the adventures
which were achieved by the enterprising valour
of the Normans. Pilgrimage and the holy wars,
introduced into Europe the specious miracles of
Arabian magic. Fairies and giants, flying
dragons, and enchanted palaces, were blended
with the more simple fictions of the west; and
the fate of Britain depended on the art, or the
predictions of Merlin. Every nation embraced
and adorned the popular romance of Arthur and
the knights of the round table: their names were
celebrated in Greece and Italy; and the voluminous
tales of Sir Lancelot and Sir Tristram were
devoutly studied by the princes and nobles, who
disregarded the genuine heroes and historians of
antiquity. At length the light of science and
reason was rekindled; the talisman was broken;
the visionary fabric melted into air, and by a
natural, though unjust reverse of the public
opinion, the severity of the present age is inclined
to question even the <i>existence</i> of Arthur.
// File: 221.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art57
ALCHEMY.
.sp 2
About the year 296, the Emperor Diocletian
published a very remarkable edict which instead of
being condemned as the effect of jealous tyranny,
deserves to be applauded as an act of prudence
and humanity. He caused a diligent enquiry to
be made for all the ancient books which treated
of the art of making gold and silver, and without
pity committed them to the flames; apprehensive,
it is remarked, lest the opulence of the Egyptians
should inspire them with confidence to rebel
against the empire. But if Diocletian had been
convinced of the reality of that valuable art, far
from extinguishing the memoirs, he would have
converted the operation of it to the benefit of the
public revenue. It is much more likely, that his
good sense discovered to him the folly of such
magnificent pretensions, and that he was desirous
of preserving the reason and fortunes of his subjects
from the mischievous pursuit. It may be
remarked that these ancient books, so liberally
ascribed to Pythagoras, to Solomon, or to
Hermes, were the pious frauds of more recent
adepts. The Greeks were inattentive either to
the use or to the abuse of chemistry. In that
immense register, where Pliny has deposited the
// File: 222.png
.pn +1
discoveries, the arts, and the errors of mankind,
there is not the least mention of the transmutation
of metals, and the persecution of Diocletian
is the first authentic event in the history of
Alchemy. The conquest of Egypt by the Arabs
diffused that vain science over the globe. Congenial
to the avarice of the human heart, it was
studied in China as in Europe, with equal eagerness,
and with equal success. The darkness of
the middle ages ensured a favourable reception
to every tale of wonder, and the revival of learning
gave new vigour to hope, and suggested
more specious arts of deception. Philosophy,
with the aid of experience, has at length banished
the study of alchemy; and the present age,
however desirous of riches, is content to seek
them by the humbler means of commerce and
industry.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art58
ACCOUNT OF SEVERAL NOBLE FAMILIES IN ENGLAND WHO OWE THEIR ELEVATION TO THE PEERAGE TO THEIR ANCESTORS HAVING BEEN ENGAGED IN TRADE.
.sp 2
It is a striking and peculiar feature in the
constitution of England, that men who render
themselves eminent in the liberal sciences, in the
arts, or in commerce, frequently find their pursuits
// File: 223.png
.pn +1
conduct them to a high degree of rank and
estimation in the state; and the sovereign has, in
numerous instances, conferred the honour of the
Peerage on certain individuals, who have contributed
by their abilities to enlarge and promote
the manufactures and commerce of the nation.
Among the families whose ancestors have
deserved well of their country, and who owe
their elevation to the Peerage to their forefathers
having been engaged in trade, the following are
honourable instances.

The <sc>Earls of Coventry</sc> are descended
from John Coventry, son of William Coventry,
of the city of that name. The former was an
opulent mercer, and resided in London, of which
city he was Lord Mayor in 1425, and one of the
executors of the celebrated Whittington. He
was a resolute and determined magistrate, and
was highly commended for his spirited interference
in the dreadful quarrel between Humphrey
Duke of Gloucester, and the insolent
Cardinal Beaufort, which he successfully quelled.

The family of <sc>Rich</sc>, Earls of Warwick and
Holland, arose from Richard Rich, an opulent
mercer, sheriff of London in the year 1441.
His descendant, Richard, was distinguished by
his knowledge of the law; became Solicitor
General in the reign of king Henry the eighth,
and treacherously effected the ruin of Sir Thomas
More; was created a baron of the realm in the
// File: 224.png
.pn +1
reign of Edward the sixth, and became Lord
Chancellor by the favour of the same monarch.

The <sc>Holles’s</sc>, Earls of Clare, and afterwards
Dukes of Newcastle, sprung from Sir William
Holles, Lord Mayor of London in 1540, son of
William Holles, citizen and baker. His great-grandson
was the first who was called to the
House of Peers, in the reign of James the first,
by the title of Lord Haughton, and soon after
was advanced to the dignity of Earl of Clare.
The fourth peer of that title was created by king
William, Duke of Newcastle; but the title
became extinct in his name in 1711.

Sir <sc>Thomas Leigh</sc>, Lord Mayor of London,
in 1558, furnished the Peerage with the addition
of two. He was the son of Roger Leigh, of
Wellington, in Shropshire. Sir Thomas’s grandson,
Francis, was created by Charles the first,
Lord Dunsmore, and afterwards Earl of Chichester;
and Sir Thomas’s second son, Sir Thomas
Leigh, of Stoneleigh, had the honour of being
called to the House of Peers by the title of Lord
Leigh, of Stoneleigh.

The <sc>Pleydell-Bouveries</sc>, Earls of Radnor,
descend from Edward De Bouverie, an
opulent Turkey merchant, who died in 1694.

<sc>Ducie</sc>, Lord Ducie, is descended from Sir
Robert Ducie, who belonged to the company of
merchant tailors, and was sheriff of London in
1621, and Lord Mayor in 1631. He was
// File: 225.png
.pn +1
immensely rich, and was made banker to king
Charles the first, and on the breaking out of the
rebellion, lost £80,000, owing to him by his
Majesty. Nevertheless he is said to have left at
the time of his death, property in land, money,
&c. to his four sons, to the amount of £400,000.

<sc>Paul Bayning</sc>, sheriff of London in 1593,
had a son of the same name, who was first
created a baronet, and in the third of Charles
the first, a baron of the realm, by the title of
Baron Bayning, and soon after a viscount, by
the title of Viscount Bayning of Sudbury. He
was buried in the paternal tomb, in the church
of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Olave’s. His house was in Mark-lane.
After the fire of London, the business of the
custom house was transacted in that which went
under the name of Lord Bayning’s.

The <sc>Cranfields</sc>, Earls of Middlesex, rose
from Lionel Cranfield, a citizen of London, bred
up in the custom house. He became, in 1620,
Lord Treasurer of England. The Duke of
Dorset is descended from Frances, sister and
heir of the third Earl of Middlesex, married to
Richard, Earl of Dorset.

The noble family of <sc>Ingram</sc>, Viscount Irwin,
was raised in the reign of queen Elizabeth, by
Hugh Irwin, citizen, merchant, and tallow-chandler,
who died in 1612. He left a large
fortune between two sons; of whom Sir Arthur,
the younger, settled in Yorkshire, and purchased
// File: 226.png
.pn +1
a considerable estate, the foundation of the good
fortune afterwards enjoyed by the family. The
present Marchioness of Hertford is the representative
of the Ingrams, being the daughter and
co-heir of the last Viscount Irwin.

Sir <sc>Stephen Brown</sc>, son of John Brown,
of Newcastle, Lord Mayor of London, in 1438,
and again in 1448, was a grocer, and added
another peer, in the person of Sir Anthony
Brown, created Viscount Montagu, by Philip
and Mary, in 1554.

The <sc>Legges</sc> rose to be Earls of Dartmouth.—The
first who was raised to the peerage was that
loyal and gallant naval officer, George Legge,
created Baron of Dartmouth in 1682. He was
descended from an ancestor who filled the Pretorian
Chair of London in the years 1347 and
1354, having by his industry in the trade of a
skinner, attained great wealth.

Sir <sc>Geoffrey Bullen</sc>, Lord Mayor in
1458, was grandfather of Thomas, Earl of
Wiltshire, father of Anna Bullen, and grandfather
of queen Elizabeth, the highest genealogical
honour the city of London ever possessed.

Sir <sc>Baptist Hicks</sc> was a great mercer at
the accession of James the first, and made a
large fortune, by supplying the court with silks.
He was first knighted, and afterwards created
Viscount Campden. It is said he left his two
daughters one hundred thousand pounds each.
// File: 227.png
.pn +1
He built a large house in <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> John’s street, for
the justices of Middlesex to hold their sessions in,
which (till its demolition a few years ago, upon
the erection of a new sessions house on Clerkenwell
Green,) retained the name of Hicks’ Hall.

The <sc>Capels</sc>, Earls of Essex, are descended
from Sir William Capel, draper, Lord Mayor
in 1503. He first set up a cage in every ward
of London, for the punishment of idle people.
It is probable that he had his mansion on the
site of the present Stock Exchange, in Capel
Court, so called after him.

<sc>Michael Dormer</sc>, mercer, Mayor in 1542,
was the ancestor of the Lords Dormer.

<sc>Edward Osborne</sc>, was apprentice to Sir
William Hewet, clothworker. About the year
1536, when his master lived in one of those
tremendous houses on London bridge, a servant
maid was playing with his only daughter in her
arms, in a window over the water, and accidentally
dropped the child. Young Osborne, who was
witness to the misfortune, instantly sprung into
the river, and beyond all expectations brought
her safe to her terrified family. When she was
marriageable, several persons of rank paid their
addresses to her, and among others the Earl of
Shrewsbury; but Sir William gratefully declined
in favour of Osborne.—“<sc>Osborne</sc> <i>saved her</i>,”
said he, “<i>and</i> <sc>Osborne</sc> <i>shall enjoy her</i>.” In
her right he possessed a most ample fortune.
// File: 228.png
.pn +1
He became sheriff of London in 1575, and Lord
Mayor in 1583, and from his loins sprung the
Dukes of Leeds.

From Sir <sc>William Craven</sc>, merchant
tailor, Mayor in 1611, sprung the gallant Earl
Craven, who was his eldest son, and was greatly
distinguished by his actions in the service of the
unfortunate Elector Palatine, by his attachment
to the Dowager, and his marriage with that
illustrious Princess.

Lord Viscount <sc>Dudley and Ward</sc> is
descended from William Ward, a wealthy goldsmith
in London, and jeweller to Henrietta
Maria, queen of Charles the first. His son
Humble Ward, married Frances, grand-daughter
of Edward Sutton, Lord Dudley; who, on the
death of her grand-father, became Baroness
Dudley; and he himself was created in 1643,
Lord Ward of Birmingham.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art59
LAST MOMENTS OF QUEEN CAROLINE.
.sp 2
A little before the Queen died she asked
the physician who was in attendance, “How
long can this last?” And on his answering “Your
majesty will soon be eased of your pains;” she
replied “The sooner the better!” The queen
// File: 229.png
.pn +1
then repeated a prayer of her own composing, in
which there was such a flow of natural eloquence,
as demonstrated the vigour of a great and good
mind. When her speech began to falter, and
she seemed expiring, she desired to be raised up
in her bed, and fearing that nature would not
hold out long enough without artificial support
she called to have water sprinkled upon her, and
a little after desired it might be repeated. She
then with the greatest composure and presence
of mind, requested her weeping relations to kneel
down and pray for her. Whilst they were reading
some prayers, she exclaimed “Pray aloud,
that I may hear,” and after the Lord’s prayer was
concluded, in which she joined as well as she
was able, said “So,” and waving her hand, lay
down and expired.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art60
THE BRITONS, ACCORDING TO THE GREEK AND LATIN CLASSICS.
.sp 2
Strabo observes in his Geography, that
“the woods are their towns; for having fenced
round a wide circular space with trees hewn
down, they there place their huts, and fix stalls
for their cattle; but not of long duration. They
have dwellings of a round form, constructed of
// File: 230.png
.pn +1
poles and wattled work, with very high pointed
coverings of beams united at a point.”

Diodorus Siculus asserts, that “they inhabit
very wretched dwellings, composed for the most
part of reeds (or straw) and wood.”

Cæsar thus describes, not Londinium, but the
capital of Cassivellaunus: “The Britons call a
place, a town, when they have fortified thick
impassable woods, by means of a <i>vallum</i> and
fosse, or a high bank and a ditch; in which sort
of a place they are accustomed to assemble together,
to avoid the invasion of enemies.”

Tacitus describing the strong holds, to which
Caractacus resorted, observes: “They then
fortified themselves on steep mountains; and,
where-ever there was any possibility of access in
any part, he constructed a great bank of stones,
like a <i>vallum</i>.”

The curious reader is referred to the first
volume of King’s Munimenta Antiqua, for prints
and plans, both of the Welsh houses and fortresses,
<i>of which some are yet entire</i> and others in ruins,
in every part of England, Scotland, Wales,
and Ireland. No book, either in our tongue, or
in any of the European languages, is so complete
and satisfactory on this interesting and domestic
subject: the prints are excellent.

Diodorus Siculus also notices that the Britons
laid up their corn in subterranean repositories,
whence they used to take a portion every day;
// File: 231.png
.pn +1
and having bruised and dried the grain, made a
kind of food from it of immediate use. Martin
in his description of the Western Isles, (<abbr=page>p.</abbr> 204.)
describes this sort of diet, and the quick mode
of preparing it, as yet continued. King, in
the <abbr='forty-eighth'>48th</abbr> and following pages of his first volume,
<i>has detected, and delineated these rude monuments
of our ancestors</i>.

It is highly curious to trace the appearance of
the persons of our forefathers and their manners.
Cæsar remarks that they painted themselves with
vitrum, or woad; and Herodian, that some of
them on the sea-coast punctured or <i>tattooed</i>[#] their
// File: 232.png
.pn +1
bodies with figures resembling various kinds of
animals; in consequence of which they also went
without garments, that they might not cover, nor
conceal, these marks. The other natives were,
in <i>general</i>, clad with skins. They had long lank
hair, but were shorn in every part of the body,
except the head and upper lip.

A wretched substitute for salt was obtained
merely by pouring sea-water on the embers of
burning wood.
// File: 233.png
.pn +1

The Irish drank the blood of animals and even
of their enemies.

King, in the latter half of the first volume,
(<i>Munim. Ant.</i>) gives prints of the altars, or
<i>Cromlechs</i>, yet entire, in many situations in
Ireland, the Highlands, and England, on which
human victims were cruelly murdered.

The Druids were richly clad; some of them
even wore golden chains, or collars, about their
necks and arms; and had their garments dyed
with various colours, and adorned with gold.
Chains also both of iron and gold, were worn by
some of the chieftains and nobler ranks. These
facts will appear so incredible, that the reader
must be informed, that in most of the tumuli, or
old British graves, described by King, these ornaments
are found in our days. It is a remarkable
omission in Mr. King, that he did not quote the
three verses from the fourteenth chapter of
Isaiah so descriptive of the Babylonian regal
tumuli, similar to the British: “All the kings
of the nations lie down in glory, each in his own
sepulchre: To meet thee, O Sennacherib,
Hades rouseth his mighty dead: he maketh them
rise up from their thrones. All of them shall
accost thee, and shall say unto thee, Art thou
become weak as we? Art thou made like unto
us? Is then thy pride brought down to the
grave? Is the vermin become thy couch, and
the earth-worm thy covering?”
// File: 234.png
.pn +1

Strabo, at the end of his third book, says, that
“the Cassiterides, or Islands of Tin, were inhabited
by men dressed in black garments, in
tunics descending to the feet, a girdle around
their breast; walking erect with a staff in their
hand; and permitting the beard to grow like
that of a goat. They subsist on their cattle, in
general spending an erratic pastoral life.”

Some of the common order of Britons wore,
instead of the skins of beasts, very thick coarse
wrappers made of wool; a sort of blanket or rug,
fastened about the neck with a piece of sharp
pointed stick. They used also a coarse, slit, short
vest, with sleeves; it barely reached down to the
knees.

As armour, the Britons had a long two-handed
sword, hanging by a chain on the right hand side;
a great long wooden shield as tall as a man;
long spears; and a sort of missile wooden instrument,
like a javelin, longer than an arrow, which
they darted merely by the hand: modern writers
call these two last mentioned, <i>Celts</i>, fixed on
the end of staves and sticks. Some of them used
slings for stones, others had breast plates, made
of plates of iron, with hooks, or with wreathed
chains: some had helmets of different forms.
Many went to battle nearly naked, and some
wound chains of iron around their necks and loins.

They generally lay and reposed themselves on
the bare ground, yet most of them ate their food
// File: 235.png
.pn +1
sitting on seats. A very beautiful print is given
by Mr. King of their various dresses. The plaid
seems to be derived from them. The coins of the
old British, which are engraven in Speed, in Borlase’s
Cornwall, in Gough’s edition of Camden’s
Britannia, and in Plot’s History of Oxfordshire,
will explain these descriptions of the classics.
Even Julius Cæsar had noticed that the Britons
used either brass money, or iron circular coins
reduced to a standard weight. In the scale of
civilization, therefore, the ancient Britons were
as advanced in the era of Cæsar, as the Romans
themselves at the expulsion of their kings; as
the Grecians in the age of Homer; as the Mexicans
at the Spanish conquest; and as the
modern Tartars.[#]

.fn #
The practice of tattooing is of great antiquity, and has
been common to numerous nations in Turkey, Asia, the
Southern parts of Europe, and perhaps to a great portion of
the inhabitants of the earth. It is still retained among some
of the Moorish tribes, who are, probably, descendants of
those who, formerly, were subjected to the Christians of
Africa, and who to avoid paying taxes, like the Moors,
thus imprinted crosses upon their skins, that they might pass
for Christians. This custom, which originally might serve
to distinguish tribes by their religion, or from each other,
became afterwards a mode of decoration that was habitually
retained, when all remembrance of its origin was effaced.

It may be inferred that the Canaanites and the other
nations of the East, were in the habit of tattooing their skins,
because Moses, (Levit. <abbr=nineteen>xix</abbr>, 28.) expressly enjoins the Israelites
not to imprint any marks upon their bodies, in imitation
of the heathens.

The ancient inhabitants of the British Islands, painted
their skins in various grotesque figures, with the juice of
woad. This custom of tattooing was in use both by the
Britons and their first invaders, the Belgæ, and I believe it
will be found, that the warriors of all those nations which
practised tattooing, invariably threw off their garments in the
hour of battle. The name of Picts, is said, though erroneously,
to have been given by the Romans to the Caledonians, who
possessed the East coast of Scotland, from their painting their
bodies. This circumstance has made some imagine that the
Picts were of British extraction, and a different race of men
from the Scots. That more of the Britons who fled northward,
from the oppression and tyranny of the Romans,
settled in the low lands of Scotland, than among the Scots
of the mountains, may be easily imagined, from the very
nature of the country. It was these people who introduced
painting among the Picts, From this circumstance, some
antiquaries affirm, proceeded the name of the latter, to distinguish
them from the Scots, who never had that art among
them, and from the Britons, who discontinued the practice of
tattooing after the Roman conquest.

The inhabitants of the South Sea Islands, at this day,
paint upon their bodies various grotesque figures, for the
purpose of striking terror into their enemies, in the day
of battle. <abbr rend=spell>J. S.</abbr>
.fn-
.fn #
From the Classical Journal.
.fn-
.sp 4
.h2 id=art62
THE SEVEN SLEEPERS.
.sp 2
Among the insipid legends of ecclesiastical
history, one of the most memorable is that of the
Seven Sleepers, whose imaginary date corresponds
with the reign of the younger Theodosius and
the conquest of Africa by the Vandals, or sometime
about the year 440. When the Emperor
Decius persecuted the Christians, seven noble
// File: 236.png
.pn +1
youths of Ephesus concealed themselves in a spacious
cavern in the side of an adjacent mountain;
where they were doomed to perish by the tyrant,
who gave orders that the entrance should be firmly
secured with a pile of huge stones. They immediately
fell into a deep slumber, which was
miraculously prolonged, without injuring the
powers of life, during a period of one hundred
and eighty seven years. At the end of that time,
the slaves of Adolius, to whom the inheritance of
the mountain had descended, removed the stones
to supply materials for some rustic edifice; the
light of the sun darted into the cavern, and the
Seven Sleepers were permitted to awake. After
a slumber, as they thought of a few hours, they
were pressed by the calls of hunger; and resolved
that Jamblichus, one of their number, should
secretly return to the city, to purchase bread for the
use of his companions. The youth, if we may still
employ that appellation, could no longer recognise
the once familiar aspect of his native country;
and his surprize was increased by the appearance of
a large cross triumphantly erected over the principal
gate of Ephesus. His singular dress and obsolete
language, confounded the baker, to whom
he offered an ancient medal of Decius as the current
coin of the empire; and Jamblichus, on the
suspicion of a secret treasure, was dragged before
the judge. Their mutual enquiries produced
the amazing discovery that two centuries were
// File: 237.png
.pn +1
almost elapsed since Jamblichus and his friends
had escaped from the rage of a Pagan tyrant. The
Bishop of Ephesus, the clergy, the magistrates,
the people, and as it is said, the Emperor Theodosius
himself, hastened to visit the cavern of the
Seven Sleepers, who bestowed their benediction,
related their story, and at the same instant peaceably
expired. The origin of this marvellous
fable cannot be ascribed to the pious fraud and
credulity of the <i>modern</i> Greeks, since the authentic
tradition may be traced within half a century
of the supposed miracle. James of Sarug, a
Syrian bishop, who was born only two years
after the death of the younger Theodosius, has devoted
one of his two hundred and thirty homilies
to the praise of the young men of Ephesus.
Their legend, before the end of the sixth century,
was translated from the Syriac into the
Latin language, by the care of Gregory of Tours.
The hostile communions of the East preserve
their memory with equal reverence; and their
names are honourably inscribed in the Roman,
the Abyssinian, and the Russian Calendar.
Nor has their reputation been confined to the
Christian world. This popular tale, which
Mahomet might learn when he drove his camels
to the fairs of Syria, is introduced as a divine revelation,
into the Koran. The story of the Seven
Sleepers has been adopted, and adorned, by
// File: 238.png
.pn +1
the nations, from Bengal to Africa, who profess
the Mahometan religion; and some vestiges of a
similar tradition have been discovered in the remote
extremities of Scandinavia.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art63
JOHN RAY, THE NATURALIST.
.sp 2
Ray was the son of a blacksmith, at Black
Notley, in Essex, where he was born in 1628.
He received his education at Braintree school, at
Catharine Hall, and afterwards at Trinity
College, Cambridge. His intense studies, requiring
country air and exercise, occasioned his
predilection for botany; his first rambles in
search of plants were confined in extent, but
subsequently diverged throughout England and
Wales; and at length passing the channel he
visited many parts of Europe. His books of
instruction were the works of Johnson and
Parkinson, and the Phytologia Britannica. His
friend and companion, Francis Willoughby,[#]
// File: 239.png
.pn +1
was a gentleman as amiable as scientific, their
souls seeming to be blended together. Ray
having been ordained, did not chuse to accept of
the emoluments of the church, with which he
did not entirely unite; but just before his death,
when it was too late to gain, he became reconciled
to it. Mr. Willoughby, who died in 1672,
left him an annuity of sixty pounds, but it does
// File: 240.png
.pn +1
not appear what other property he possessed,
except his fellowship of Trinity. Though the
generations which have followed him have produced
a Linnæus, a Buffon, and a Pennant, yet
Ray’s fame is too well established ever to be supplanted.
He was a wise, a learned, as well as a
pious and modest man, and ever ready to impart
that knowledge which he had taken so much
pains to acquire. He died in 1705 with a devout
humility that had ever distinguished him, wishing
that he had spent much more of his life in the
immediate service of his Creator. There was
no task too arduous for Ray; if Lister, a contemporary
naturalist, would have gone to the
bottom of the ocean for a shell, Ray would have
climbed to the extreme point of the Alps for a
new plant. In the church-yard of Black Notley,
his native place, there is a long and elegant
inscription to the memory of this great man, and
in the library of Trinity College, there is a fine
marble bust of him, in company with Bacon and
other splendid ornaments of that magnificent
foundation.

.fn #
This eminent naturalist and excellent man, was justly
admired both at home and abroad for his virtues and knowledge
in every branch of human learning, more particularly
in natural history. He was the son of Sir Francis Willoughby,
Knt. of Wollaton Hall in the county of Nottingham. Observing
in the busy and inquisitive age in which he lived, that
the history of animated nature had in a great measure been
neglected, he made the study and illustration thereof his
unceasing object. For the promotion of this branch of
science he went abroad with Mr. Ray, for the purpose of
searching out and describing the several species and productions
of nature. He travelled over most parts of France,
Spain, Italy, Germany, and the Netherlands, in all which
countries he was so diligent and successful, that not many
sorts of animals described by others escaped his observation.
He drew them with a pencil, and they were afterwards engraven
on copper-plates, at the expense of his widow. His
labours were printed in latin under the title of “<i>Ornithologiæ
libri tres, &c.</i> London, 1676,“ folio. This work was afterwards
translated into English by Mr. Ray, with an appendix,
and printed at London, in 1678. Mr. Willoughby
also wrote the “History of Fishes,” which was published by
Mr. Ray, at London, in 1686, in folio. He likewise printed
several papers in the Philosophical Transactions. Mr.
Willoughby died on the third of July, 1672, leaving issue by
his wife, Emma, daughter and co-heir of Sir Henry Bernard,
Knt. two Sons, Francis and Thomas, and one daughter
Cassandra, married to the Duke of Chandos. The second
son Thomas was in 1712 created Lord Middleton, from
whom is descended the present peer of that title.
.fn-
// File: 241.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art65
LONDON BANKERS, AND THEIR ORIGIN.
.sp 2
The company of Goldsmiths, in London,
appeared as a fraternity, as early as 1180, but
it was in the reign of Edward the third, that
they were first incorporated. They became, in
time, the bankers of the capital. The <i>Lombards</i>
were the first and greatest, and most of the
money contracts, in old times, passed through
their hands. Many of our monarchs were obliged
to them for money.—The three blue balls, now
used by pawnbrokers, but converted by them
into golden ones, are, in reality, the arms of the
Lombards.

Lombard-street, in the metropolis, took its name
from being the residence of the Lombards, the
great money-changers and usurers of early times.
They came out of Italy into this kingdom before
the year 1274; at length their extortions became
so great, that Edward the third seized on
their estates; perhaps the necessity of furnishing
himself with money for his Flemish expedition,
might have urged him to this step. They
seem quickly to have repaired their loss; for
complaint was soon after made against them,
for persisting in their practices. They were so
// File: 242.png
.pn +1
opulent in the days of Henry the fourth, as to be
able to furnish him with money, but they took
care to get the customs mortgaged to them, by
way of security.

They continued in Lombard-street till the reign
of queen Elizabeth, and to this day it is filled
with the shops of eminent bankers. The shop of
the great Sir Thomas Gresham stood in Lombard-street;
it is now occupied by Messrs. Martin and
Stone, bankers, who are still in possession of the
original sign of that illustrious person, the
<i>Grasshopper</i>.

The business of goldsmiths was confined to
the buying and selling of plate, and foreign coins
of gold and silver, melting them, and coining
others at the mint. The banking was accidental
and foreign to their institution.

Regular banking by private persons resulted
in 1643 from the calamity of the times, when a
seditious spirit was incited by the acts of the
parliamentary leaders. The merchants and
tradesmen who before trusted their cash to their
servants and apprentices found that mode no
longer safe; neither did they dare to leave it in
the mint at the tower, by reason of the distresses
of majesty itself, which before was a place of
public deposit. In the year 1645, they first
placed their cash in the hands of goldsmiths,
who then began publicly to exercise the two
professions of goldsmiths and bankers. Even of
// File: 243.png
.pn +1
late years there were several very eminent bankers
who kept the goldsmith’s shop; but they
were more frequently separated.

The first regular banker was Mr. Francis
Child, goldsmith, who began business after the
restoration. He was the father of the profession,
a person of large fortune, of most respectable
character, and he was knighted by the king. He
lived in Fleet-street, in the house adjoining
Temple-bar, where the banking business is still
carried on in the same firm, though by different
persons. Granger, in his Biographical History,
mentions that Mr. Child succeeded Mr. Backwell,[#]
a banker in the time of Charles the
second, noted for his integrity, abilities, and industry;
who was ruined by the shutting up of
the Exchequer in 1672.[#] His books were placed
in the hands of Mr. Child, and still remain in the
family.
// File: 244.png
.pn +1

The next ancient shop was that possessed at
present by Messrs. Snow and Co. in the
Strand, a few doors westward of Mr. Child’s,
who were goldsmiths of consequence in the
latter part of the same reign. Mr. Gay celebrates
the predecessor of these gentlemen, for
his sagacity in escaping the ruin of the fatal year
1720, in his epistle to Mr. Thomas Snow, goldsmith,
near Temple-bar:—

.pm verse-start
O thou whose penetrative wisdom found
The <i>South Sea</i> rocks and shelves where thousands drown’d,
When credit sunk and commerce gasping lay,
Thou stoodst; nor sent’st one bill unpaid away.
.pm verse-end

To the westward of Temple-bar the only other
house was that of Messrs. Middleton and Campbell,
goldsmiths, who flourished in 1692, and is
now continued with great credit by Mr. Coutts.
From thence to the extremity of the west end of
the town there were none till the year 1756, when
the respectable name of Backwell rose again, conjoined
with those of Darel, Hart, and Croft, who
with great reputation opened their shop (afterwards
the house of Devaynes, Noble, and Co.) in
Pallmall.

.fn #
He was an alderman of London, and after the Exchequer
was shut retired to Holland, where he died, and was
brought over to be interred in the church of Tyringham, in
Buckinghamshire, where he lies embalmed. A glass is placed
over his face, so that it is likely he may even be seen at this
time. There is a small portrait of him at Tyringham House,
in which he is represented in long hair and a flowered gown,
with a table by him.
.fn-
.fn #
A part of the national debt, amounting to £664,263,
is as old as this iniquitous transaction of Charles the second
and his ministers. This sum was all that those persons received,
who had placed their property and their confidence
in that monarch, for the loss of £1,328,526, and 26 years
interest thereon at 6 per cent. about £2,100,000 more.
.fn-
// File: 245.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art66
ELUCIDATION OF THE ORNAMENTS WITH WHICH THE GREEKS AND ROMANS ADORNED THE HUMAN HEAD ON COINS AND MEDALS.
.sp 2
.h3
THE DIADEM.
.sp 2
The chief of these ornaments is the diadem,
or vitta, which was a ribband worn about the
head, and tied in a floating knot behind. This
was anciently the simple, but superlative badge
of kingly power. It is observable upon the Greek
monarchical medals, from the earliest ages, to the
last, without any other ornament, and is almost
an infallible sign of kingly power, and that the
portrait, if there be no other characteristic, is that
of a prince. In the Roman coins it is seen on the
Consular ones with Numa and Ancus; but never
afterwards till the time of Licinius. So great
an aversion had the Romans to this kingly distinction,
that their emperors had for more than two
centuries worn the radiated crown, peculiar to
the gods, before they dared to assume the
diadem, which was considered as the symbol of
tyranny. In the family of Constantine, the
diadem becomes common, though not with the
// File: 246.png
.pn +1
ancient simplicity, being ornamented on either
edge with a row of pearls, and various other decorations.

The Greek queens used the diadem, but the
Roman empresses never appear with it; however,
the variety of their head dresses more than compensates
for the want of this ornament.
.sp 2
.h3
THE RADIATED CROWN.
.sp 2
The radiated crown was, at first, as on the
posthumous coins of Augustus, a mark of deification,
and in little more than a century after,
was put upon most of the emperors’ heads on
their several medals.
.sp 2
.h3
THE CROWN OF LAUREL.
.sp 2
The crown of laurel was at first the honorary
prize of conquerors, but was afterwards commonly
worn, at least on their medals, by all the
Roman emperors, from <sc>Julius Cæsar</sc>, who
was permitted by the senate to wear it always,
to hide the baldness of his forehead. This perhaps
gave rise to the first emperors always appearing
with it on their coins, a circumstance
continued even to our times, and looking at its
origin is now a little laughable. The laurel
employed by the ancients in forming their crowns,
is apparently what we term the Alexandrian
laurel, a most beautiful evergreen, of a fine
tender verdure. In the lower empire the laurel
is often held by a hand above the head as a mark
of piety.
// File: 247.png
.pn +1
.sp 2
.h3
THE ROSTRAL CROWN.
.sp 2
Agrippa appears on his coins with the rostral
crown, a sign of naval victory or command,
being made of gold, in resemblance of prows of
ships, tied together.
.sp 2
.h3
THE MURAL CROWN.
.sp 2
Agrippa is likewise seen with the mural or
turretted crown, the prize of first ascending the
walls of an enemy’s city.
.sp 2
.h3
THE CIVIC CROWN.
.sp 2
The oaken or civic crown is frequent on
reverses, as of Galba and others; and was the
badge of having saved the life of a citizen, or of
many citizens.
.sp 2
.h3
THE HELMET.
.sp 2
The helmet appears on coins; as in those of
Macedon under the Romans, which have a head
of Alexander, sometimes covered with a helmet.
Probus also has often the helmet on his coins;
and Constantine the first, has helmets of different
forms curiously ornamented.
.sp 2
.h3
THE NIMBUS OR GLORY.
.sp 2
The nimbus or glory, now peculiar to the
saints, was formerly applied to emperors. A
nimbus appears round the head of Constantine
the second, in a gold coin of that prince; and of
Flavia Maxima Fausta, in a gold medallion;
and of Justinian in another. But the idea is as
ancient as the reign of Augustus, and is found in
Roman authors, before it appeared on coins.
// File: 248.png
.pn +1
Oiselius gives a coin of Antoninus Pius, with the
<i>nimbus</i>, but this however is doubtful, and may
have been some flaw in the coin from which he
engraved his representation.
.sp 2
.h3
OTHER ORNAMENTS OF THE HEAD.
.sp 2
Besides the diadem, the Greek princes sometimes
appear with the laurel crown. The
Arsacidæ, or kings of Parthia, wear a kind of
sash round the head, with their hair in rows of
curls like a wig. Tigranes and the kings of
Armenia, wear the <i>tiara</i>, a singular kind of cap,
but the well known badge of imperial power in
the ancient eastern world. Xerxes, a petty prince
of Armenia, appears in a coin extant of him in a
conical cap, with a diadem around it. Juba, the
father, has a singular crown, like a conical cap, all
hung with pearls.

The successors of Alexander assumed by way
of distinction, different symbols of the Deity, to
be observed on the busts of their medals, such as
the lion’s skin of Hercules, which surrounds the
head of the first Seleucus; the horn placed
behind the ear, an image of their strength and
power, or of their being the successors of Alexander,
called the son of Jupiter Ammon; the
wing placed in like manner behind the ear,
symbolic of the rapidity of their conquests, or of
their being descendants from the god Mercury.

Some authors, however, have doubted if all
these heads be not of gods, except those with
// File: 249.png
.pn +1
the horn. Eckhel observes, that even the horn
and diadem belong to Bacchus, as on a coin of
Nuceria Alfaterna. Bacchus, according to
Diodorus Siculus, invented the diadem, to cure
his head-aches, and was horned like his father
Jupiter Ammon. The only king who appears
on coins, according to Eckhel, with the horn, is
Lysimachus. Pyrrhus had a crest of goats’ horns
to his helmet, as we are informed by Plutarch, in
his life, and the goat was the symbol of Macedon.
It is likely that the successors of Alexander took
this badge of the horn in consequence.

Besides the distinctions of supreme power, or
honorary reward, there are other symbolic ornaments
of the head, observable on some Roman
coins. Such is the veil, or, more properly, the
<i>toga</i> drawn over the head, to be seen on the
busts of Julius Cæsar, when Pontifex Maximus,
and others. This shews that the person bore
the pontificate or the augurship; the augurs
having a particular gown, called <i>laena</i>, with
which they covered their heads, when employed
in observing omens. Latterly the veil is only a
mark of consecration, and is common in coins of
empresses, as Faustina, Mariniana, and others.
In the coins of Claudius Gothicus we first find it
as a mark of the consecration of an emperor;
and it continued in those of Constantius the first,
Maximian the first, and Constantine the first.

The remarkable part of the Roman head dress
// File: 250.png
.pn +1
among the ladies, was the <i>sphendona</i>, or sling,
on the crown of the head; answering to the
modern hair cushion. But it was of gold, and
so prominent as to be even remarkable in a coin.
The hair appears in many fashions, as now. Sometimes
the bust of an empress is supported by a
crescent, to imply that she was the moon, as her
husband was the sun of the state.

Generally, only the bust is given on ancient
coins; but sometimes half the body or more. In
the latter case the hands often appear, with tokens
of majesty in them. Such is the globe, said to
have been introduced by Augustus, to express
possession of the world. The sceptre, sometimes
confounded with the consular staff. The roll of
parchment, symbolic of legislative power; and
the handkerchief expressing that of the public
games, where the emperor gave the signal.
Some princes even hold the thunderbolt, shewing
that their power was equal to that of Jupiter in
heaven. Others hold an image of victory.

Most queens of Egypt, on their coins, have the
sceptre. It appears at the top of their head;
and would seem part of the dress, were it not
that in other coins, it passes beneath the neck
transversely, so that both ends appear.

The victors, at the sacred games among the
ancients, had bound round the head, an ornament
called <i>anadema</i>, which has sometimes
been confounded with the diadem worn by the
ancient Persian kings.
// File: 251.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art67
THE TRADESCANTS.
.sp 2
The Tradescants, father and son, were among
the first eminent gardeners, and were the very
first collectors of natural history in this kingdom.
John Tradescant the elder was, according to
Anthony Wood, a Fleming, or a Dutchman.
We are informed by Parkinson, that he had
travelled into most parts of Europe, and into
Barbary, and from some emblems remaining
upon his monument in Lambeth church-yard, it
appears that he had visited Greece, Egypt, and
other Eastern countries.

In his travels, he is supposed to have collected
not only plants and seeds, but most of those
curiosities of every sort which formed his collection,
which afterwards became celebrated, and
is now the Ashmolean museum, at Oxford.

When he first settled in this kingdom, cannot
at this distance of time, be ascertained; perhaps
it was towards the latter end of the reign of queen
Elizabeth, or the beginning of that of king James
the first. His portrait, engraven by Hollar,
before the year 1656, represents him as a person
very far advanced in years, and seems to countenance
this opinion.

He lived in a large house at South Lambeth,
// File: 252.png
.pn +1
where, there is reason to think, his museum was
frequently visited by persons of rank, who
became benefactors thereto; among these were
king Charles the first, to whom he was gardener,
Henrietta Maria, his queen, Archbishop Laud,
George, Duke of Buckingham, Robert and
William Cecil, Earls of Salisbury, and many
other persons of distinction.

John Tradescant may, therefore, justly be
considered as the earliest collector in this kingdom,[#]
of every thing that was curious in natural
history, namely, minerals, birds, fishes, insects,
&c. &c. He had also a good collection of coins
and medals, besides a great variety of extraordinary
rarities. Some of the plants which grew
in his garden are, if not totally extinct in this
country, at least become very uncommon.

This able man, by his great industry, made it
manifest, in the very infancy of botany, as a
science, that there is scarcely any plant existing
in the known world, that will not, with proper
care, thrive in this kingdom. The time of his
death cannot be ascertained, no mention being
made of it in the register of Lambeth church.

John Tradescant the son, and his wife, joined
in a deed of gift, by which their friend Elias
Ashmole was entitled to this collection after the
decease of the former. On that event taking
// File: 253.png
.pn +1
place, in 1662, it was accordingly claimed by
him, but the widow Tradescant refusing to
deliver it, was compelled so to do by a decree
of the court of Chancery. She was, a few years
after, found drowned, in a pond, in her own
garden.

His house at South Lambeth, then called
Tradescant’s Ark,[#] thus coming into the possession
of Ashmole, he came to reside there in
1674, and added a noble room to it, adorning
the chimney with his arms, impaling those of
Sir William Dugdale, whose daughter was his
third wife. Ashmole was much respected by
his contemporaries, and was frequently visited
at South Lambeth by persons of very exalted
rank, particularly by the ambassadors of foreign
princes, to whom he had presented his book on
the Order of the Garter.

It is well known that Tradescant’s collection
was given by Ashmole to the University of
Oxford, where it forms the principal part of the
museum that goes by his name, the house, in
which it is contained, having been built for its
reception.[#]
// File: 254.png
.pn +1

A monument was erected in the south east
part of Lambeth church-yard, in 1662, by Hester,
the relict of John Tradescant, the son, to the
memory of her husband, and the other members
of his family.

This, once beautiful monument has suffered
so much by the weather, that no just idea can
now, on inspection, be formed of the north and
south sides; but this defect is supplied from very
fine drawings[#] in the Pepysian library, at Cambridge.
On the east side is Tradescant’s arms;
on the west a hydra, and under it a skull; on
the south, broken columns, Corinthian capitals,
&c. supposed to be ruins in Greece, or some
other Eastern country; and on the north, a
crocodile, shells, &c. and a view of some Egyptian
buildings; various figures of trees, &c. in
relievo, adorn the four corners of the monument.

In a visit made by Sir <abbr rend=spell>W.</abbr> Watson and Dr.
Mitchell to Tradescant’s garden, in 1749, an
// File: 255.png
.pn +1
account of which, is inserted in Philos. Trans.
<abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> <abbr rend=arabic>xlvi.</abbr> <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 160, it appears that it had been
many years totally neglected, and the house
belonging to it empty and ruined, but though the
garden was quite covered with weeds, there
remained among them manifest footsteps of its
founder.[#] They found there the <i>Borago latifolia
sempervirens</i> of Caspar Bauhine; <i>Polygonatum
vulgare latifolium, C. B</i>; <i>Aristolochia clematitis
recta, C. B.</i> and <i>Dracontium</i> of Dodoens.
There were then remaining two trees of the
<i>Arbutus</i>, which from their being so long used to
our winters, did not suffer by the severe cold of
1739-40, when most of their kind were killed
in England. In the orchard there was a tree of
the <i>Rhamnus catharticus</i>, about 20 feet high, and
nearly a foot in diameter. There are at present
no traces of this garden remaining.

The Tradescants were usually called Tradeskin
by their contemporaries, and the name is
uniformly so spelled in the parish register of
Lambeth, and by Flatman the painter, who in a
poem mentions Tradescant’s collection;
// File: 256.png
.pn +1

.pm verse-start
“Thus John Tradeskin starves our wond’ring eyes,
”By boxing up his new-found rarities.“
.pm verse-end

The following is a list of the portraits of the
Tradescant family now in the Ashmolean Museum;
both father and son are in these portraits
called Sir John, though it does not appear that
either of them were ever knighted.

1. Sir John Tradescant, sen. a three quarters
piece, ornamented with fruit, flowers, and
garden roots.

2. The same, after his decease.

3. The same, a small three-quarters piece, in
water colours.

4. A large painting of his wife, son and
daughter, quarter-length.

5. Sir John Tradescant, junior, in his garden,
with a spade in his hand, half length.

6. The same with his wife, half length.

7. The same, with his friend Zythepsa of
Lambeth, a collection of shells, &c. upon a table
before them.

8. A large quarter piece inscribed Sir John
Tradescant’s second wife and son.

These pictures have neither date nor painter’s
name. They are esteemed to be good portraits,
but who the person was, who is called Zythepsa
is not known. He is painted as if entering the
room, and Sir John is shaking him by the hand.

Hollar engraved two portraits of the Tradescants,
father and son, which are placed as
// File: 257.png
.pn +1
frontispieces to the little volume, mentioned in
the preceding note.

Granger (2. 370) says he saw a picture at a
gentleman’s house in Wiltshire, which was not
unlike that of the deceased Tradescant, and the
inscription was applicable to it:—

.pm verse-start
Mortuus haud alio quam quo pater ore quiesti
Quam facili frueris nunc quoque nocte doces.
.pm verse-end

.fn #
Tradescant was the first English collector of curiosities
in a private rank. Thoresby was the second. <i>Gough’s Topogr</i>.
.fn-
.fn #
The late James West, <abbr=Esquire>Esq.</abbr> told Mr. Bull, that one of
the family of Roelans, of which there are four or five prints
by Hollar, lived a long while at Lambeth, in the house that
afterwards belonged to Tradescant, to whom Roelans sold it.
<i>Granger’s B. II.</i> 2. 371.
.fn-
.fn #
In the year 1656 the younger Tradescant, published a
small volume, entitled “Museum Tradescantianum, or a
Collection of Rarities preserved at South Lambeth. London,
1656, small octavo.” This book is divided into two parts,
the first containing a catalogue of the museum, and the second
an enumeration of the plants, shrubs, and trees, growing in
the garden at South Lambeth. Among the natural curiosities
here preserved are “a dragon’s egg—the claw of the bird
<i>Rock</i>, which, as authors report, is able to trusse an elephant,”
&c. &c.
.fn-
.fn #
These drawings are engraven in the Philosophical Trans.
<abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 63, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 88; and printed from the same plates, in Bibl.
Topogr. Brit. <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 2. in Dr. Ducarel’s Hist. of Lambeth.
.fn-
.fn #
Tradescant’s was the next botanical garden in England
after Gerard’s.

Gerard seems to have been the first that cultivated a
botanical garden. He had a large one near his house in
Holborn, London, where he raised nearly eleven hundred
different trees and plants. He published his history of plants
in 1597 under the patronage of Lord Burleigh. His herbal
was republished in 1636 by Johnson.
.fn-
.sp 4
.h2 id=art68
ORANGE TREES.
.sp 2
The first orange trees seen in England, are
said to have been planted by Sir Francis Carew,
at Beddington, in Surrey. Sir Francis died in
1607, aged 81. Aubrey says they were brought
from Italy by Sir Francis, but the editors of the
Biographia Britannica speaking from a tradition
preserved in the family, tell us that they were
raised by him from the seeds of the first oranges
which were imported into England by Sir
Walter Raleigh, who had married his niece.
The trees were planted in the open ground, and
were preserved in the winter by a moveable shed.
They flourished about a century and a half, being
destroyed by the hard frost in 1739-40.

In the transactions of the Linnæan Society
there are some notices relating to the progress of
botany in England, written by the late eminent
// File: 258.png
.pn +1
naturalist, Peter Collinson. Speaking of the
orange trees at Beddington be says—“In the
reign of queen Elizabeth the first orange and
lemon trees were introduced into England by
two curious gentlemen, one of them Sir Nicholas
Carew, at Beddington. They were planted in
the natural ground, but against every winter an
artificial covering was raised for their protection.
I have seen them some years ago[#] in great perfection.
But this apparatus going to decay,
without due consideration a green-house of brick
work was built all round them, and left on the
top uncovered in the summer. I visited them a
year or two after in their new habitation, and to
my great concern found some dyeing, and all declining;
for although there were windows on
the south side, they did not thrive in their confinement;
but being kept damp, with the rains,
and wanting a free, airy, full sun, all the growing
months of summer, they languished, and at last
all died.

“A better fate has attended the other fine
parcel of orange trees, &c. brought over at the
same time, by Sir Robert Mansell, at Margam
in South Wales. My nephew counted 80 trees
of citrons, limes, burgamots, Seville and China
orange-trees, planted in great cases all ranged in
a row before the green-house. This is the finest
sight of its kind in England. He had the
// File: 259.png
.pn +1
curiosity to measure one of them. A China
orange measured in the extent of its branches
fourteen feet.  A Seville orange-tree was fourteen
feet high, the case included, and the stem
twenty one inches round. A China orange-tree
twenty two inches and a half in girt.

“I visited the orangery at Margam, in the year
1766, in company with Mr. Lewis Thomas, a very
sensible and attentive man, who told me that the
orange-trees, &c. in that garden were intended
as a present from the king of Spain to the king
of Denmark; and that the vessel in which they
were shipped, being taken in the channel, the
trees were made a present of to Sir Robert
Mansell.”

.fn #
This was written in the year 1754.
.fn-
.sp 4
.h2 id=art69
ARTICLES OF USE AND LUXURY INTRODUCED INTO EUROPE BY THE ROMANS.
.sp 2
Whatever evils either reason or declamation
have imputed to extensive empire, the power
of Rome was attended with some beneficial consequences
to mankind; and the same freedom of
intercourse which extended the vices, diffused
likewise the improvements of social life. In the
more remote ages of antiquity, the world was
unequally divided. The east was in the immemorial
// File: 260.png
.pn +1
possession of arts and luxury; whilst the
west was inhabited by rude and warlike barbarians,
who either disdained agriculture, or to whom
it was totally unknown. Under the protection
of an established government, the productions of
happier climates, and the industry of more civilized
nations were gradually introduced into the
western countries of Europe, and the natives
were encouraged, by an open and profitable commerce,
to multiply the former, as well as to improve
the latter. It would be almost impossible
to enumerate all the articles, either of the
animal or vegetable kingdoms which were successively
imported into Europe from Asia and
Egypt; it is only intended here to touch on a
few of the principal heads. It is also not improbable
that the Greeks and Phœnicians introduced
some new arts and productions into the neighbourhood
of Marseilles and Cadiz.

1. Almost all the flowers, the herbs, and the
fruits, that grow in our European gardens, are
of foreign extraction, which in many cases, is
betrayed even by their names; the apple was a
native of Italy, and when the Romans had tasted
the richer flavour of the apricot, the peach,
the pomegranate, the citron, and the orange,
they contented themselves with applying to all
these new fruits the common denomination of
apple, discriminating them from each other by
the additional epithet of their country.
// File: 261.png
.pn +1

2. In the time of Homer, the vine grew wild
in the island of Sicily, and most probably in the
adjacent continent; but it was not improved by
the skill, nor did it afford a liquor grateful to the
taste, of the savage inhabitants. A thousand
years afterwards, Italy could boast, that of the
fourscore most generous and celebrated wines,
more than two thirds were produced from her
soil. The blessing was soon communicated to
the Narbonnese province of Gaul; but so intense
was the cold to the north of the Cevennes, that
in the time of Strabo, it was thought impossible
to ripen the grapes in those parts of Gaul. The
intense cold of a Gallic winter was even proverbial
among the ancients. This difficulty, however,
was gradually vanquished; and there is some
reason to believe that the vineyards of Burgundy
are as old as the age of the Antonines. In the
beginning of the fourth century, the orator Eumenius
speaks of the vines in the territory of
Autun, which were decayed through age, and
the first plantation of which was totally unknown.

3. The olive, in the western world, followed
the progress of peace, of which it was considered
as the symbol. Two centuries after the foundation
of Rome, both Italy and Africa were
strangers to that useful plant; it was naturalized
in those countries; and at length carried into the
heart of Spain and Gaul. The timid errors of
the ancients, that it required a certain degree of
// File: 262.png
.pn +1
heat, and could only flourish in the neighbourhood
of the sea, were insensibly exploded by
industry and experience.

4. The cultivation of flax was transported
from Egypt to Gaul, and enriched the whole
country, however it might impoverish the particular
lands on which it was sown.

5. The use of artificial grasses became familiar
to the farmers both of Italy and the provinces,
particularly the lucerne, which derived its name
and origin from Media. The assured supply of
wholesome and plentiful food for the cattle during
winter, multiplied the number of the flocks and
herds, which, in their turn, contributed to the
fertility of the soil.

To all these improvements may be added an
assiduous attention to mines and fisheries, which
by employing a multitude of laborious hands,
serves to increase the pleasures of the rich, and
the subsistence of the poor. The elegant treatise
of Columella describes the advanced state of the
Spanish husbandry, under the reign of Tiberius;
and it may be observed, that those famines, which
so frequently afflicted the infant republic, were
seldom or never experienced by the extensive
empire of Rome. The accidental scarcity, in
any single province, was immediately relieved
by the plenty of its more fortunate neighbours.
// File: 263.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art70
ACCOUNT OF THE ESCAPE OF THE EARL OF NITHSDALE, FROM THE TOWER, IN THE YEAR, 1716.
.sp 2
Lord Nithsdale was one of the Scottish
noblemen who were concerned in the rebellion
headed by the Earl of Mar, in the year 1715.
The House of Commons preferred articles of
impeachment against him, and several others,
who all, except the Earl of Wintoun, pleaded
guilty, and on the <abbr=ninth>9th</abbr> of February, 1716,
received judgment of death. The countess of
Nithsdale and lady Nairne threw themselves at
the king’s feet as he passed through the apartments
of the palace, and implored his mercy in
behalf of their husbands; but their tears and
entreaties were of no avail. The countess
finding that nothing would appease the king
but the death of her husband and the other
lords, planned the earl’s escape from the tower in
woman’s apparel, which she safely effected.
The letter, of which the following is a copy,
written by herself and addressed to her sister
lady Lucy Herbert, abbess of the Augustine
nunnery at Bruges, giving an account of that
transaction is still preserved in the family, and
was in the possession of the late Marmaduke
Constable Maxwell, <abbr=Esquire>Esq.</abbr> of Everingham in
Yorkshire.
// File: 264.png
.pn +1

”<i>Palais Royal de Rome, <abbr=eighteenth>18th</abbr> April, 1718.</i>

“Dear Sister,

“My Lord’s escape is now such an old story,
that I have almost forgotten it; but since you
desire me to give you a circumstantial account
of it, I will endeavour to recal it to my memory,
and be as exact in the narration as I possibly can;
for I owe you too many obligations to refuse you
any thing that lies in my power.

“I think I owe myself the justice to set out
with the motives which influenced me to undertake
so hazardous an attempt, which I despaired
of thoroughly accomplishing, foreseeing a thousand
obstacles, which never could be surmounted
but by the most particular interposition of
Divine Providence. I confided in the Almighty
God, and trusted that he would not abandon me,
even when all human succours failed me.

“I first came to London upon hearing that
my Lord was committed to the Tower, I was at
the same time informed that he had expressed
the greatest anxiety to see me, having, as he
afterwards told me, nobody to console him till I
arrived. I rode to Newcastle, and from thence
took the stage to York. When I arrived there
the snow was so deep that the stage could not
set out for London. The season was so severe,
and the roads so extremely bad, that the post
itself was stopt; however, I took horses, and rode
to London through the snow, which was generally
// File: 265.png
.pn +1
above the horse’s girth, and arrived safe and
sound without any accident.

“On my arrival I went immediately to make
what interest I could amongst those who were in
place. No one gave me any hopes; but all to
the contrary, assured me, that although some of
the prisoners were to be pardoned, yet my lord
would certainly not be of the number. When
I enquired into the reason of this distinction, I
could obtain no other answer, than that they
would not flatter me; but I soon perceived the
reasons which they declined alleging to me.
A roman catholic, upon the frontiers of Scotland,
who headed a very considerable party—a man
whose family had always signalized itself by its
loyalty to the royal house of Stuart, and who was
the only support of the catholics against the inveteracy
of the Whigs, who were very numerous in
that part of Scotland, would become an agreeable
sacrifice to the opposite party. They still retained
a lively remembrance of his grandfather, who defended
his own castle of Carlaverock to the very
last extremity, and surrendered it up only by the
express command of his royal master. Now
having his grandson in their power, they were determined
not to let him escape from their hands.

“Upon this I formed the resolution to attempt
his escape, but opened my intentions to nobody
but my dear Evans. In order to concert measures
I strongly solicited to be permitted to see
// File: 266.png
.pn +1
my lord, which they refused to grant me, unless
I would remain confined with him in the Tower.
This I would not submit to, and alleged for
excuse, that my health would not permit me to
undergo the confinement. The real reason of
my refusal was, not to put it out of my power to
accomplish my design; however, by bribing the
guards, I often contrived to see my lord, till the
day upon which the prisoners were condemned;
after that we were allowed for the last week to
see and take our leave of them.

“By the help of Evans, I had prepared every
thing necessary to disguise my lord, but had the
utmost difficulty to prevail upon him to make
use of them; however, I at length succeeded by
the help of <sc>Almighty God</sc>.

“On the <abbr='twenty-second'>22d</abbr> of February, which fell on a
Thursday, our petition was to be presented to
the House of Lords, the purport of which was
to intreat the lords to intercede with his majesty
to pardon the prisoners. We were, however,
disappointed the day before the petition was to be
presented; for the Duke of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Alban’s, who had
promised my Lady Derwentwater to present it,
when it came to the point, failed in his word:
however, as she was the only English countess
concerned, it was incumbent upon her to have it
presented. We had one day left before the
execution, and the duke still promised to present
the petition; but, for fear he should fail, I
// File: 267.png
.pn +1
engaged the Duke of Montrose to secure its being
done by the one or the other. I then went in
company of most of the ladies of quality who
were then in town, to solicit the interest of the
lords, as they were going to the house. They
all behaved to me with great civility, but particularly
my Lord Pembroke, who, though he
desired me not to speak to him, yet promised to
employ his interest in our favour, and honourably
kept his word; for he spoke in the house very
strongly in our behalf. The subject of the debate
was, whether the king had the power to pardon
those who had been condemned by parliament?
And it was chiefly owing to Lord Pembroke’s
speech, that it passed in the affirmative: however,
one of the lords stood up and said, that
the house would only intercede for those of the
prisoners who should approve themselves worthy
of their intercession, but not for all of them indiscriminately.
This salvo quite blasted all my
hopes; for I was assured it aimed at the exclusion
of those who should refuse to subscribe to
the petition, which was a thing I knew my lord
would never submit to; nor, in fact, could I wish
to preserve his life on such terms.

“As the motion had passed generally, I thought
I could draw some advantage in favour of my
design. Accordingly, I immediately left the
House of Lords, and hastened to the Tower,
where, affecting an air of joy and satisfaction, I
// File: 268.png
.pn +1
told all the guards I passed by, that I came to
bring joyful tidings to the prisoners. I desired
them to lay aside their fears, for the petition had
passed the house in their favour. I then gave
them some money to drink to the lords and his
majesty, though it was but trifling; for I thought
that if I were too liberal on the occasion, they
might suspect my designs, and that giving them
something would gain their good humour and
services for the next day, which was the eve of
the execution.

“The next morning I could not go to the
Tower, having so many things in my hands to
put in readiness; but in the evening when all
was ready, I sent for Mrs. Mills, with whom I
lodged, and acquainted her with my design of
attempting my lord’s escape, as there was no
prospect of his being pardoned; and this was the
last night before the execution. I told her that
I had every thing in readiness, and I trusted that
she would not refuse to accompany me, that my
lord might pass for her. I pressed her to come
immediately, as we had no time to lose. At the
same time I sent for Mrs. Morgan, then usually
known by the name of Hilton, to whose acquaintance
my dear Evans had introduced me, which
I looked upon as a very singular happiness. I
immediately communicated my resolution to her.
She was of a very tall and slender make, so I
begged her to put under her own riding-hood, one
// File: 269.png
.pn +1
that I had prepared for Mrs. Mills, as she was to
lend her’s to my Lord, that in coming out he
might be taken for her. Mrs. Mills was then
with child; so that she was not only of the same
height, but nearly of the same size as my lord.
When they were in the coach, I never ceased
talking, that they might have no leisure to reflect.
Their surprise and astonishment, when I first
opened my design to them, had made them consent,
without ever thinking of the consequences.
On our arrival at the Tower, the first I introduced
was Mrs. Morgan; for I was only
allowed to take in one at a time. She brought
in the clothes that were to serve Mrs. Mills,
when she left her own behind her. When Mrs.
Morgan had taken off what she had brought
for my purpose, I conducted her back to the
staircase; and in going I begged her to send
me in my maid to dress me; that I was afraid
of being too late to present my last petition that
night, if she did not come immediately. I despatched
her safe, and went partly down stairs to
meet Mrs. Mills, who had the precaution to hold
her handkerchief to her face, as was very natural
for a woman to do when she was going to bid
her last farewell to a friend on the eve of his
execution. I had indeed desired her to do it,
that my lord might go out in the same manner.
Her eyebrows were rather inclined to be sandy,
and my lords were dark and very thick; however,
// File: 270.png
.pn +1
I had prepared some paint of the colour of her’s,
to disguise his with. I also brought an artificial
head-dress of the same coloured hair as her’s;
and I painted his face with white and his cheeks
with rouge, to hide his long beard, as he had
not time to shave. All this provision I had before
left in the Tower.

The poor guards, whom my slight liberality
the day before had endeared to me, let me go
quietly with my company, and were not so strictly
on the watch as they usually had been; and the
more so, as they were persuaded, from what I
had told them the day before, that the prisoners
would obtain their pardon. I made Mrs. Mills
take off her own hood, and put on that which I
had brought for her; I then took her by the hand
and led her out of my lord’s chamber; and in
passing through the next room, in which there
were several people, with all the concern imaginable,
I said, “My dear Mrs. Catherines, go in
all haste, and send me my waiting maid; she
certainly cannot reflect how late it is; she forgets
that I am to present a petition to-night, and if
I let slip this opportunity I am undone, for to-morrow
will be too late. Hasten her as much as
possible, for I shall be on thorns till she comes.”
Every body in the room, who were chiefly
the guards’ wives and daughters, seemed to compassionate
me exceedingly, and the sentinel very
officiously opened the door to me. When I had
// File: 271.png
.pn +1
seen her out I returned back to my lord, and
finished dressing him. I had taken care that
Mrs. Mills did not go out crying as she came in,
that my lord might the better pass for the lady
who came in crying and afflicted, and the more
so, because he had the same dress she wore.
When I had almost finished dressing my lord in
all my petticoats excepting one, I perceived
that it was growing dark, and was afraid that
the light of the candles might betray us, so I resolved
to set off; I went out leading him by the
hand, and he held his handkerchief to his eyes;
I spoke to him in the most piteous and afflicted
tone of voice, bewailing bitterly the negligence
of Evans, who had ruined me by her delay.
Then, said I, “My dear Mrs. Betty, for the
love of <sc>God</sc> run quickly, and bring her with
you; you know my lodging, and if ever you
made despatch in your life, do it at present, I am
almost distracted with this disappointment.”
The guards opened the doors, and I went down
stairs with him, still conjuring him to make all
possible despatch. As soon as he had cleared
the door I made him walk before me, for fear
the sentinel should take notice of his walk, but
I still continued to press him to make all the despatch
he possibly could. At the bottom of the
stairs I met my dear Evans, into whose hands I
confided him. I had before engaged Mr. Mills
to be in readiness, before the Tower, to conduct
// File: 272.png
.pn +1
him to some place of safety, in case we succeeded.
He looked upon the affair so very improbable
to succeed, that his astonishment, when
he saw us, threw him into such consternation,
that he was almost out of himself, which Evans
perceiving, with the greatest presence of mind,
without telling him any thing, lest he should
mistrust them, conducted him to some of her
own friends, on whom she could rely, and so
secured him, without which we should have been
undone. When she had conducted him, and left
him with them, she returned to find Mr. Mills,
who, by this time, had recovered himself from his
astonishment. They went home together, and
having found a place of security, they conducted
him to it.

In the mean while, as I had pretended to have
sent the young lady on a message, I was obliged
to return up stairs and go back to my lord’s
room, in the same feigned anxiety of being too
late, so that every body seemed sincerely to
sympathize with my distress. When I was in
the room, I talked to him, as if he had been
really present, and answered my own questions
in my lord’s voice, as nearly as I could imitate
it. I walked up and down, as if we were conversing
together, till I thought they had time
enough thoroughly to clear themselves of the
guards. I then thought proper to make off also.
I opened the door, and stood half in it, that those
// File: 273.png
.pn +1
in the outward chamber might hear what I said,
but held it so close, that they could not look in.
I bid my lord a formal farewell, for that night,
and added that something more than usual must
have happened to make Evans negligent on this
important occasion, who had always been so
punctual in the smallest trifles; that I saw no
other remedy than to go in person; that if the
Tower were still open when I finished my business,
I would return that night; but that he
might be assured I would be with him as early
in the morning as I could gain admittance into
the Tower, and I flattered myself I should bring
favourable news. Then, before I shut the door,
I pulled through the string of the latch, so that
it could only be opened on the inside. I then
shut it with some degree of force, that I might
be sure of its being well shut. I said to the
servant as I passed by, that he need not carry in
candles to his master till my lord sent for him,
as he desired to finish some prayers first. I went
down stairs, and called a coach. As there were
several on the stand, I drove home to my lodgings,
where poor Mr. Mackenzie had been
waiting to carry the petition, in case my attempt
had failed. I told him there was no need of any
petition, as my lord was safe out of the Tower,
and out of the hands of his enemies, as I hoped;
but that I did not know where he was.

I discharged the coach, and sent for a sedan
// File: 274.png
.pn +1
chair, and went to the Duchess of Buccleugh,
who expected me about that time, as I had begged
of her to present the petition for me, having
taken my precautions against all events, and
asked if she was at home; and they answered,
that she expected me, and had another duchess
with her. I refused to go up stairs, as she had
company with her, and I was not in a condition
to see any other company. I begged to be shewn
into a chamber below stairs, and that they would
have the goodness to send her grace’s maid to
me, having something to say to her. I had discharged
the chair, lest I might be pursued and
watched. When the maid came in, I desired
her to present my most humble respects to her
grace, who they told me had company with her,
and to acquaint her that this was my only reason
for not coming up stairs. I also charged her
with my sincerest thanks for the kind offer to
accompany me when I went to present my petition.
I added, that she might spare herself any
further trouble, as it was now judged more
advisable to present one general petition in the
name of all; however, that I should never be
unmindful of my particular obligations to her
grace, which I would return very soon to acknowledge
in person.

I then desired one of the servants to call a chair,
and I went to the duchess of Montrose, who had
always borne a part in my distress. When I
// File: 275.png
.pn +1
arrived, she left her company to deny herself, not
being able to see me under the affliction which
she judged me to be in. By mistake I was,
however admitted; so there was no remedy.
She came to me; and as my heart was in extasy
of joy, I expressed it in my countenance as she
entered the room. I ran up to her in a transport
of joy. She appeared to be extremely shocked
and frightened; and has since confessed to me
that she apprehended my trouble had thrown me
out of myself, till I communicated my happiness
to her. She then advised me to retire to some
place of security; for that the king was highly
displeased, and even enraged at the petition that
I had presented to him, and had complained of
it severely. I sent for another chair, for I always
discharged them immediately, lest I might be
pursued. Her grace said she would go to court
to see how the news of my lord’s escape was
received. When the news was brought to the
king he flew into an excess of passion, and said
he was betrayed; for it could not have been
done without some confederacy. He instantly
despatched two persons to the Tower to see that
the other prisoners were well secured, lest they
should follow the example. Some threw the
blame upon one, some upon another. The duchess
was the only one at court who knew it.

When I left the duchess I went to a house which
Evans had found out for me, and where she promised
// File: 276.png
.pn +1
to acquaint me where my lord was; she got
thither some few minutes after me, and told me
that when she had seen him secure, she went in
search of Mr. Mills, who, by this time, had recovered
himself from his astonishment; that he had
returned to her house, where she found him, and
that he had removed my lord from the first place,
where she had desired him to wait, to the house
of a poor woman, directly opposite to the guard-house;
she had but one small room up one pair
of stairs, and a very small bed in it.—We threw
ourselves upon the bed, that we might not be
heard walking up and down. She left us a
bottle of wine and some bread; and Mrs. Mills
brought us some more in her pocket the next
day. We subsisted on this provision from Thursday
till Saturday night, when Mrs. Mills came
and conducted my lord to the Venetian ambassador’s.

We did not communicate the affair to his
excellency; but one of his servants concealed
him in his own room till Wednesday, on which
day the ambassador’s coach and six was to go
down to Dover to meet his brother. My lord
put on a livery, and went down in the retinue,
without the least suspicion, to Dover, where Mr.
Mitchell (which was the name of the ambassador’s
servant) hired a small vessel, and immediately
set sail for Calais. The passage was so remarkably
short, that the captain threw out this reflection,
// File: 277.png
.pn +1
that the wind could not have served better
if his passengers had been flying for their lives,
little thinking it to be really the case. Mr.
Mitchell might have easily returned without being
suspected of being concerned in my lord’s escape;
but my lord seemed inclined to have him continue
with him, which he did, and has at present a good
place under our young master.

This is as exact and full an account of this
affair, and of the persons concerned in it, as I
could possibly give you, to the best of my memory,
and you may rely on the truth of it. I am, with
the strongest attachment, my dear sister, your’s
most affectionately,

WINIFRED NITHSDALE.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art71
ACCOUNT OF THE FIRST RISE OF FAIRS IN ENGLAND, AND THE MANNER OF LIVING IN THE SIXTEENTH AND SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES.
.sp 2
Before the necessaries or ornaments of life
from the convenience of communication and the
increase of provincial intercourse could be procured
in towns, through the medium of shops,
goods and commodities of every kind were chiefly
sold at fairs, to which, as to one universal mart,
// File: 278.png
.pn +1
the people resorted periodically, and supplied
most of their wants for the ensuing year.

Fairs and markets were at first held near the
castles of the great barons, and near the cathedrals
and principal churches in the cities and
great towns, not only to prevent frauds in the
king’s duties or customs, but also as they were
esteemed places where the laws of the land were
observed, and as such had a very particular
privilege.

The display of merchandize and the conflux
of customers at these principal and only emporia
of domestic commerce were prodigious, and they
were, therefore, often held on open and extensive
plains.

It appears from a curious record containing
the establishment and expenses of the Earl of
Northumberland in the year 1512, that the stores
of his lordship’s house at Wressle, for the whole
year were laid in from fairs; “He that stands
charged with my lord’s house for the whole year,
if he may possible, shall be at all fairs, where
the gross emptions (that is the principal articles)
shall be bought for the house for the whole year,
as wine, wax, beeves, muttons, wheat and malt.”

This quotation is a proof that fairs were at
that time the principal marts for purchasing
necessaries in large quantities, which now are
supplied by trading towns, and the mention
of buying beeves and muttons, (oxen and sheep)
// File: 279.png
.pn +1
shews that at so late a period they knew but little
of breeding cattle.

The great increase of shops in the retail
trade in all the towns and villages through the
kingdom since the commencement of the eighteenth
century, by means of which the inhabitants
are supplied with every article necessary
for subsistence as well as for luxury, has in a
great measure rendered useless the purposes for
which fairs were originally established. This
change in the domestic trade of the country may
be attributed partly to the facility of payment
given by the notes of the bank of England and
inland bills of exchange, and partly to the more
speedy and certain intercourse which has been
produced by the regularity of the post office.
The latter may be looked upon as the cause and
the former the effect of this change which has
so completely altered the state of fairs throughout
the kingdom.

Connected with fairs as furnishing the necessaries
of life may be given an account of the
living of the people in England in the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries.

From the household book of the Earl of Northumberland
above-mentioned it appears, that
his family, during winter, lived mostly on salted
meat and salt fish, and on that account there was
an order for providing 180 gallons of mustard.
On flesh days through the year, breakfast for the
// File: 280.png
.pn +1
earl and his lady was a loaf of bread, two manchets,
a quart of beer, a quart of wine, half a
chine of mutton, or a chine of beef boiled. On
meagre days, a loaf of bread, two manchets, a
quart of beer, a quart of wine, a dish of butter,
a piece of salt fish, or a dish of buttered eggs.
During Lent, a loaf of bread, two manchets, a
quart of beer, a quart of wine, two pieces of salt
fish, six baconed herrings, or a dish of sprats.
The other meals had as little variety, except on
festival days.

At that time capons, chickens, hens, pigeons,
rabbits, plovers, woodcocks, quails, snipes,
partridges, and pheasants, were accounted such
delicacies as to be prohibited except at the earl’s
table.

From the same book it appears that the earl
had only two cooks for dressing victuals for
his household which consisted of 229 persons.

Hollinshed, who wrote about 1577, observes
that white meats, <abbr rend=spell>i. e.</abbr> milk, butter and cheese,
formerly the chief food of the English people,
were in his time degraded to be the food of the
lowest sort, and that the wealthy fed upon flesh
and fish.

Feasts in those times were carried beyond all
bounds of moderation. There is preserved an
account of a feast given by Archbishop Nevill
at his installation, 1466, in which are mentioned,
among a great variety of others, the following
// File: 281.png
.pn +1
articles, viz. wheat 300 quarters, ale 300 tuns,
80 oxen, 6 wild bulls, 1000 sheep, 300 calves,
300 swine called porks, 2000 pigs, 200 kids,
4000 rabbits, upwards of 400 harts, bucks and
roes, 3000 geese, 2300 capons, 2000 chickens,
4000 pigeons, 100 peacocks, 200 cranes, 4000
mallards and teals, 500 partridges, 400 woodcocks;
1500 hot, and 4000 cold venison pasties,
2000 hot custards, and 4000 cold ones. On the
tables at this feast it is mentioned there were
4 porpoises and 8 seals.

There were 62 cooks and 515 servants to assist
them, and not less than 3000 persons in all were at
this feast.

At the above period there was not discovered
in society, any pleasure but that of crouding together
in hunting and feasting. The delicate
pleasures of conversation, in communicating
opinions, sentiments and desires, were wholly
unknown.

About the year 1512 the breakfast hour was
eight, and at ten they sat down to dinner; at
three in the afternoon they had a drinking, and
four was the hour for supper. The gates of the
Earl of Northumberland’s castles were shut at
nine in the evening throughout the year, “to the
intent that no servant shall come in at the said
gate, that ought to be within, who are out of
the house at that hour.”

By a household establishment of Lord Fairfax’s,
// File: 282.png
.pn +1
about 1650, it appears that eleven had then
become the hour of dining, and towards the end
of that century the hour was twelve, but from the
beginning of the last century it has gradually
grown later to the present times, when seven has
become the fashionable hour in noblemen’s houses.

In the country, and in moderate families in
the metropolis, one and two are the more general
hours for dining.

From the Percy household book it may be
observed, that several dishes were then in use
which have been long banished from our tables;
among these may be reckoned cranes, herons,
sea-gulls, bitterns and kirlews, and at archbishop
Nevill’s feast, porpoises and seals were served up.

After the accession of Henry the seventh to
the throne, the nation began to rest from the
scenes of war and blood which for several years
had subsisted between the Houses of York and
Lancaster, and in the next reign the people
turned their attention more to trade and the arts
of peace, so that we find the mode of living considerably
changed, for luxury being ever the
attendant of extended commerce, this brought us
acquainted with the produce of foreign countries
till then unknown in England.

Previously to 1509 the principal vegetables
used at the tables of the great were imported
from the Netherlands, so that when Catherine,
queen of Henry the eighth wanted a sallad, she
was obliged to despatch a messenger to Flanders.
// File: 283.png
.pn +1
Asparagus and artichokes were introduced into
England about 1578, and cauliflowers somewhat
later. Celery was not introduced into England
till after 1709, when Marshal Tallard being
made prisoner at the battle of Malplaquet, and
brought into England, first introduced this plant
on the English tables.

There is an article in the Percy household
book which says, “That from henceforth there
be no herbs bought, seeing that the cooks may
have herbs enough in my lord’s gardens.”

Since the introduction of tea into England at
the close of the seventeenth century the living of
all classes of the people has experienced a total
change, but it was not till about 1740 that tea
came to be generally used in the country, for
previously to that time those who made use of it got
it by stealth, each being afraid of being known to
be in possession of what was then termed a great
luxury.

Waller has a poem addressed to the queen
Maria d’Este, wife of James the second in 1683,
“On Tea commended by her Majesty,” whereby
it seems it was even then a new thing, though
Mr. Hanway in his Essay on Tea says that Lord
Arlington and Lord Ossory introduced it into
England in 1666, and that it was then admired
as a new thing. Their ladies introduced it
among the women of quality, and its price was
then £3 per pound, and continued the same till
1707. In 1715 green tea began to be used, and
// File: 284.png
.pn +1
the practice of drinking tea descended to the
middling classes of the people.

In the Tatler (<abbr=number>No.</abbr> 86, <abbr=october>Oct.</abbr> 27, 1709) the author
mentions inviting his friends, seemingly as though
tea was common, to drink a dish of tea, which
they refused, saying they never drank tea in the
morning.

The same author observes, that dinner had in
his memory, crept by degrees from twelve o’clock
to three, and in the Spectator it is said that
coffee houses were frequented by shopkeepers
from six in the morning, and that the students at
law made their appearance in them in their night
gowns about eight. A lady who sends her journal
to the Spectator represents herself as taking
chocolate in bed, and sleeping after it till ten,
and drinking her Bohea from that hour till eleven.
Her dinner hour was from three to four, and she
did not sit up later at a card party than twelve.
A citizen out of trade, in the same work, describes
himself as rising at eight, dining at two, and
going to bed at ten if not kept up at the club he
frequented.

The history of Taverns in this country may
be traced back to the time of king Henry the
fourth, for so ancient is that of the Boar’s Head
in East Cheap, London, the rendezvous of prince
Henry and his riotous companions. Of little less
antiquity is the White Hart without Bishopsgate,
which now bears in the front of it, the date of
its erection, 1480.
// File: 285.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art72
SIR RICHARD CLOUGH.
.sp 2
Sir Richard Clough was a man of distinguished
character, who raised himself by his merit, from
a poor boy at Denbigh to be one of the greatest
merchants of his time. He was first a chorister
at Chester, then had the good fortune to become
apprentice to the famous Sir Thomas Gresham,
and afterwards his partner, with whom he may
be considered as joint founder of the Royal
Exchange, having contributed several thousand
pounds towards that noble design. His residence
was chiefly at Antwerp, where after his death
his body was interred; his heart at Whitchurch,
in the vicinity of Denbigh. He is said to have
made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and to have
been a knight of the holy sepulchre; and he
accordingly assumed the five crosses, the badge
of that order, for his arms. His wealth was so
great, that his name became proverbial, and the
Welsh have a saying, on any person’s attaining
great riches, that he <i>is become a <sc>Clough</sc></i>. Sir
Richard left two daughters, but it is probable
that they enjoyed but an inconsiderable part of
his wealth, which is said to have gone to Sir
Thomas Gresham, according to an agreement
in case of survivorship. Sir Richard died first,
but the time is unknown. Sir Thomas survived
till the year 1579.
// File: 286.png
.pn +1

The original hint of the Royal Exchange was
given to Sir Thomas Gresham by Sir Richard
Clough, who in the year 1561, had been advanced
by the former, to be his correspondent and agent
in the then emporium of the world, Antwerp.
Clough wrote to his master, to blame the
citizens of London for neglecting so necessary a
thing; bluntly saying that “they studied nothing
else but their own private profit; that they were
content to walk about in the rain, more like pedlars
than merchants, and that there was no kind of
people but had their place to transact business in,
in other countries.” Thus stimulated, Sir Thomas,
in 1566, laid the foundation, and the next year
completed what was then called the <i>Bourse</i>, which
three years after on being visited by queen Elizabeth,
was dignified by her with the title of <i>Royal
Exchange</i>.

An original picture of Sir Richard Clough
is preserved at Llanywern, the seat of Sir Thomas
Salusbury, <abbr=baronet>Bart</abbr>. It is a half length extremely
well painted on board, his hair is very short, and
of a dark brown. He is dressed in a short close
jacket, black, striped with white, and great white
breeches. In his right hand a glove; his left
on his sword; on his right side is a dagger.
The arms of the holy sepulchre, which he had
assumed, are on one side of the picture. It was
probably painted at Antwerp, which at this period
abounded with artists of the first merit.
// File: 287.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art73
ROYAL CLEMENCY.
.sp 2
Lewis the thirteenth of France being desirous
to sit as judge at the trial of the Duke de la
Vallette, assembled, in his cabinet, some members
of the Parliament, together with some
counsellors of state, to consult on the propriety
of such a step. Upon their being compelled by
the king to give their opinions concerning the
decree for his arrest, the president, De Believre,
said, “That he found it very strange that a prince
should pass sentence upon one of his subjects;
that kings had reserved to themselves the power
of pardoning, and left that of condemning to
their officers; that his majesty wanted to see
before him at the bar, a person, who by his
decision was to be hurried away in an hour’s
time into another world. That this is what a
prince’s countenance, from whence favours flow,
should never bear; that his presence alone removed
ecclesiastical censures; and that subjects
ought not to go away dissatisfied from their
prince.”  When sentence was passed, the same
president said, “This is an unprecedented judgment,
and contrary to the example of past ages,
to see a king of France, in the quality of a judge,
condemning a gentleman to death.”—It may be
proper to add, that the sentence was afterwards
revoked.
// File: 288.png
.pn +1

It has always been urged against king James
the second, as a proof of the inveterate cruelty
of his disposition, that he should have ordered
the Duke of Monmouth into his presence, and
not pardoned him. Welwood, in his Memoirs,
says, that James, in this instance, made an exception
to a general rule observed inviolably by
kings, “never to allow a criminal, under sentence
of death, the sight of his prince’s face,
without a design to pardon him.”

The custom of pardoning criminals, by admitting
them into the presence of the sovereign, is of
very ancient date. When Agag, king of the
Amalekites, had been taken prisoner by Saul
(1 <abbr=Samuel>Sam.</abbr>, <abbr=fifteen>xv.</abbr> 20-33) and his life spared by that
monarch, contrary to the divine command, and
was afterwards brought into the presence of
Samuel, he exclaimed “Surely the bitterness of
death is past,” evidently in allusion to this custom.
But Samuel executed the command of <sc>God</sc>, by
putting Agag to death, which ought to have
been done by Saul, on taking him prisoner.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art74
LOTTERIES.
.sp 2
As a source of revenue, this is only a modern
invention; and it is evident, were it not for the
monopoly of this species of gambling, which the
government insists on enjoying, that it could not
// File: 289.png
.pn +1
possibly prove of any material advantage; for
individuals would soon set up private lotteries,
could afford to carry them on with less profit,
and would soon draw all the benefit of such
speculations to themselves.

The Romans had lotteries, particularly whilst
they were under the government of the emperors.
The tickets were distributed gratis among those
guests who attended their entertainments, and
all of them gained some prize. Heliogabalus
took pleasure in making the prizes of very disproportionate
value. Some of the prizes were
ten camels, others ten flies, some ten pounds of
gold, ten eggs, and the like. The plays which
Nero gave, were concluded by lotteries, consisting
of prizes of wheat, wine, stuffs, gold, silver,
slaves, ships, houses, and lands.

In England, lotteries certainly took place in
the reign of queen Elizabeth. According to
Raynal, the two American companies in her
reign, were favoured with the first lottery that
ever was drawn in her dominions. The first
however, of which we have any regular account
was drawn in the year 1569. It consisted of
400,000 lots, at ten shillings each; the prizes
were plate, and the profits were to go towards
repairing the havens of this kingdom. It was
drawn at the west door of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Paul’s Cathedral.
The drawing began on the 11th of January,
1569, and continued incessantly, day and night,
// File: 290.png
.pn +1
until the sixth of May, following. There were
then only three lottery offices in London. It
was at first intended to have been drawn at the
house of Mr. Derricke, the queen’s jeweller,
but was afterwards drawn as above mentioned.

The proposals for this lottery were published
in the years 1567 and 1568. Dr. Rawlinson
shewed the Society of Antiquaries in 1748, “A
proposal for a very rich lottery, general, without
any blanks, containing a great number of good
prizes, as well of ready money as of plate and
certain sorts of merchandizes, having been valued
and prized by the commandment of the queen’s
most excellent majesty’s order, to the intent that
such commodities as may chance to arise thereof,
after the charges borne, may be converted
towards the reparations of the havens, and
strength of the realm, and towards such other
public good works. The number of lots shall
be 400,000 and no more, and every lot shall be
the sum of ten shillings sterling and no more.
To be filled by the feast of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Bartholomew.
The shew of prizes are to be seen in Cheapside,
at the sign of the Queen’s Arms, the house
of Mr. Derricke, goldsmith, servant to the
queen.”

In the year 1612, king James in special favour
for the plantation of English colonies in Virginia,
granted a lottery to be held at the west end of
<abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Paul’s, whereof one Thomas Sharplys, a
// File: 291.png
.pn +1
tailor of London, had the chief prize, which
was 4000 crowns in plate.

Lotteries were revived in the reign of William
the third, and as all our evils were then attributed
to Dutch counsels, the blame of lotteries, those
banes of industry, frugality, and virtue, was ascribed
to an imitation of the example of Holland,
and a wish in the natives of that country to ruin
our morals, as well as to cramp our trade.

In the reign of queen Anne it was thought
necessary to suppress lotteries as nuisances to
the public. They have, however, been revived
of late years, and are now carried forward in a
more extensive manner than at any former period.
.sp 4
.h2 id=art75
HERCULANEUM MANUSCRIPTS.
.sp 2
The following account of the ancient rolls of
Papyrus, discovered at Herculaneum, and the
method employed to unroll them, is extracted
from a letter written in 1802, by the <abbr=honourable>Hon.</abbr> Henry
Grey Bennett, addressed to the late <abbr=Reverend>Rev.</abbr> Samuel
Henley, <abbr rend=spell>D. D.</abbr>

“The <i>papyrus</i> of the Greeks and Romans was
the inside coating of a plant of the same name;
which was formerly common in various parts of
Sicily; a small river now choaked up near
// File: 292.png
.pn +1
Palermo was called the <i>Papyrus</i>, probably from
the number of that species of plant which grew
in its bed; the same name was also given to
various rivulets in the island. It is however
most common in the neighbourhood of Syracuse,
where a Sicilian a few years ago established a
manufactory of that article, more indeed to
gratify the wishes of the curious, than to reap
any immediate profit. The texture is not so
fine as in the Egyptian or eastern manuscripts,
which exist in the libraries of Paris. This may
be owing probably to the method of preparation,
and not to any difference in the plant.

“The <i>papyri</i> are joined together, and form
one roll, on each sheet of which, the characters
are painted, standing out in a species of <i>bas
relief</i>, and singly to be read with the greatest
ease. As there are no stops, a difficulty is found
in joining the letters, in making out the words,
and in discovering the sense of the phrase. The
manuscripts were found in a chamber of an excavated
house, in the ancient Herculaneum, to
the number of about 1800, a considerable part of
which were in a state to be unrolled. That city
was buried for the most part under a shower of
hot ashes, and the manuscripts were reduced by
the heat to a state of tinder, or to speak more
properly, resembled paper which has been burnt.
Where the baking has not been complete, and
where any part of the vegetable juice has
// File: 293.png
.pn +1
remained it is almost impossible to unroll them,
the sheets towards the centre, being so closely
united. In the others as you approach to the
centre, or conclusion, the manuscripts become
smoother, and the work proceeds with greater
rapidity. A manuscript, by Epicurus, was unrolled
in March, 1802, twenty seven sheets of
which were taken off, not indeed so well as
could have been hoped, but a great part sufficiently
intelligible, to judge of the style of the
author, and the nature of its contents. It unfortunately
fell to the lot of a young beginner, who
in his hurry to conclude, spoiled much more
than he saved.

“The <i>papyri</i> are very rough on the outside, and
in some there are great holes. All the inequalities
are made smooth, previous to unrolling them,
with facility; in consequence much must inevitably
be lost. Great care, however, is taken to
preserve all the pieces, and when broken off,
they are placed in the same sheet, preserving
their original position.

“When first Mr. Hayter began this process,
there was one man tolerably expert, and three
only who had ever seen the manner of it; consequently,
all were to be taught. This may
serve as a reason why, as yet, so little has been
done. One Latin manuscript was found, but it
was in too bad a state to promise any chance of
// File: 294.png
.pn +1
success. They are of different sizes, some containing
only a few sheets, as a single play, others
some hundreds, and a few, perhaps, two thousand.
We may hope from the first, Menander, and
from the others, the histories of Livy and Diodorus
Siculus, perhaps the Doric poetry of the
Sicilian muse, or the philosophy of the schools
of Agrigentum and of Syracuse. We are led
from the nature of the manuscripts to trust, that
the indefatigable labours, the attention, and industry
of Mr. Hayter will not be thrown away,
and that the assistance to be derived from the
English minister, Mr. Drummond, as well on
account of his classical knowledge, and his love
of literature, as the advantages arising from his
situation, may command ultimate success, and
secure to those who are engaged in this business,
the protection of the Neapolitan government, and
the thanks of the literary world.”
.sp 4
.h2 id=art76
WOLVES IN ENGLAND.
.sp 2
King Edward the first commissioned Peter
Corbet to destroy the wolves in the counties of
Gloucester, Worcester, Hereford, Salop, and
Stafford, and ordered John Gilford to hunt them
in all the forests of England.
// File: 295.png
.pn +1

The forest of Chiltern was infested by wolves
and wild bulls in the time of Edward the Confessor.
William the Conqueror granted the
lordship of Riddesdale, in Northumberland, to
Robert de Umfraville, on condition of defending
that part of the country against enemies and
wolves. King John gave a premium of ten
shillings for catching two wolves.

In the reign of king Henry the third Vitalis
de Engaine held the manors of Laxton and Pitchley,
in the county of Northampton, by the service
of hunting the wolf, whenever the king should
command him. In the reign of Edward the
first, it was found by inquisition that John de
Engaine, held the manor of Great Gidding in the
county of Huntingdon by the service of hunting
the hare, fox, wild cat, and wolf, within the
counties of Huntingdon, Northampton, Buckingham,
Oxford, and Rutland. In the reign of
Edward the third, Thomas de Engaine, held
certain manors by the service of finding at his
own proper cost, certain dogs for the destruction
of wolves, foxes, martins, and wild cats, in the
counties of Northampton, Rutland, Oxford,
Essex, and Buckingham.
// File: 296.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art77
PROFESSOR PORSON.
.sp 2
This eminent scholar and acute critic was
born at East Ruston, in the county of Norfolk,
on the <abbr='twenty-fifth'>25th</abbr> of December, 1759. At a very
early period he displayed talents which gave
promise of future excellence, and some gentlemen
who admired his acquirements in learning, sent
him to Eton, from whence he was afterwards
entered of Trinity College, Cambridge. The
following account of Mr. Porson, when an Eton
boy, is extracted from the evidence of Dr.
Goodall, the present Provost of Eton, given
before the Education Committee of the House
of Commons.

Dr. Goodall being asked if he was acquainted
with what happened to the late Professor Porson
to prevent his election to King’s College, replied
as follows:—

.pm letter-start
“Every account that I have read about him,
in relation to that circumstance is incorrect.
When he came to the school he was placed
rather higher by the reputation of his abilities,
than perhaps he ought to have been, in consequence
of his actual attainments; and I can only
say that many of the statements in the life of
Porson are not founded in truth. With respect
to prosody, he knew but little, and as to Greek
he had made comparatively but little progress
when he came to Eton. The very ingenious
// File: 297.png
.pn +1
and learned editor of one account of him, has
been misinformed in most particulars; and
many of the incidents which he relates, I can
venture from my own knowledge to assert, are
distorted or exaggerated. Even Person’s compositions,
at an early period, though eminently
correct, fell far short of excellence; still we all
looked up to him in consequence of his great
abilities and variety of information, though much
of that information was confined to the knowledge
of his schoolfellows, and could not easily
fall under the notice of his instructors. He
always undervalued school exercises, and generally
wrote his exercises fair at once, without
study. I should be sorry to detract from the
merit of an individual whom I loved, esteemed,
and admired; but I speak of him when he had
only given the promise of his future excellence;
and in point of school exercises, I think he was
very inferior to more than one of his contemporaries;
I would name the present Marquis
Wellesley as infinitely superior to him in composition.

“On being asked whether he wrote the same
beautiful hand as he did afterwards, Dr. Goodall
replied he did, nor was there any doubt of his
general scholarship.

“To a question whether he made great progress
during the time he was at Eton, or after he left?
Dr. Goodall said he was advanced as far as he
could be with propriety, but there were certainly
// File: 298.png
.pn +1
some there who would not have been afraid to
challenge Porson as a school-boy, though they
would have shunned all idea of competition with
him at Cambridge. The first book that Porson
ever studied, as he often told me, was Chambers’s
Cyclopædia; he read the whole of that
dictionary through, and in a great degree made
himself master of the algebraic part of that work
entirely by the force of his understanding.

“Dr. Goodall was then asked if he considered
there was any ground for complaint on the part
of Porson, in not having been sent to Cambridge,
to which he answered no; he was placed as
high in the school as he well could be; as a
proof however of his merits, when he left Eton,
contributions were readily supplied by Etonians
in aid of Sir George Baker’s proposal, to secure
the funds for his maintenance at the university.”
.pm letter-end

In the year 1793, Mr. Porson was elected
professor of Greek in the University of Cambridge,
that office being then vacant by the death
of professor Cooke. The following letter relating
to this election from Mr. Porson to the <abbr=Reverend>Rev.</abbr>
Dr. Postlethwayte, master of Trinity College, is
now first printed:—

.pm letter-start
“<i>Essex Court, Temple, <abbr=sixth>6th</abbr> October, 1792.</i>

“Sir,—When I first received the favour of
your letter I must own that I felt rather vexation
and chagrin than hope and satisfaction. I had
looked upon myself so completely in the light
// File: 299.png
.pn +1
of an outcast from Alma Mater, that I had made
up my mind to have no farther connection with
the place. The prospect you held out to me
gave me more uneasiness than pleasure. When
I was younger than I now am, and my disposition
more sanguine than it is at present, I was in daily
expectation of Mr. Cooke’s resignation, and I
flattered myself with the hope of succeeding to
the honour he was going to quit. As hope and
ambition are great castle-builders, I had laid a
scheme, partly as I was willing to think, for the
joint credit, partly for the mutual advantage, of
myself and the university. I had projected a
plan of reading lectures, and I persuaded myself
that I should easily obtain a grace, permitting
me to exact a certain sum from every person
who attended. But seven years’ waiting will tire
out the most patient temper, and all my ambition
of this sort was long ago laid asleep. The sudden
news of the vacant professorship put me in
mind of poor Jacob, who having served seven
years in hopes of being rewarded with Rachel,
awoke, and behold it was Leah.

“Such, sir, I confess were the first ideas that
took possession of my mind. But after a little
reflection, I resolved to refer a matter of this
importance to my friends. This circumstance
has caused the delay, for which I ought before
now to have apologized. My friends unanimously
exhorted me to embrace the good fortune which
they conceived to be within my grasp. Their
// File: 300.png
.pn +1
advice, therefore, joined to the expectation I had
entertained of doing some small good by my
exertions in the employment, together with the
pardonable vanity which the honour annexed to
the office inspired, determined me; and I was on
the point of troubling you, sir, and the other
electors with notice of my intentions to profess
myself a candidate, when an objection which
had escaped me in the hurry of my thoughts,
now occurred to my recollection.

“The same reason which hindered me from
keeping my fellowship by the method you
obligingly pointed out to me, would, I am greatly
afraid, prevent me from being Greek professor.
Whatever concern this may give me for myself,
it gives me none for the public. I trust there
are at least twenty or thirty in the university,
equally able and willing to undertake the office;
possessed, many of talents superior to mine, and
all of a more complying conscience. This I
speak upon the supposition that the next Greek
professor will be compelled to read lectures; but
if the place remains a sinecure, the number of
qualified persons will be greatly increased. And
though it was even granted that my industry
and attention might possibly produce some benefit
to the interests of learning and the credit of
the university, that trifling gain would be as
much exceeded by keeping the professorship a
sinecure, and bestowing it on a sound believer,
as temporal considerations are outweighed by
// File: 301.png
.pn +1
spiritual. Having only a strong persuasion, not
an absolute certainty, that such a subscription is
required of the professor elect; if I am mistaken,
I hereby offer myself as a candidate, but if I am
right in my opinion, I shall beg of you to order
my name to be erased from the boards, and I shall
esteem it a favour conferred on, Sir,

Your obliged humble servant,

R. PORSON.”
.pm letter-end

.tb


.pm letter-start
<i>Letter from the <abbr=Reverend>Rev.</abbr> Joseph Goodall, <abbr rend=spell>D. D.</abbr>
Upper Master (now Provost) of Eton College,
to Mr. Porson.</i>

“<i>Eton, Nov. 16th, 1806.</i>

“Dear Porson,—The bishop of Rochester
[Dr. Dampier] has written to me requesting my
assistance on the following subject. ‘On summing
up matters the Oxford people find no
account of the Eton <abbr rend=spell>MS</abbr> of Strabo, of which
use has been made, and want one for their
preface.’ Now the said bishop, urged by his
brother of Oxford [Dr. Randolph] at the same
time he hints that you have examined the MS in
question, and advises me to enter upon the
subject with you, which I most gladly do, praying
for such information as you may be disposed
to give me, being fully persuaded that you are
not likely to forget what you have once seen.

“I write to the bishop by this post to acknowledge
my incompetence. How glad should
Mrs. Goodall and myself be, if you would take
// File: 302.png
.pn +1
the trouble of once more inspecting the MS and
dating your kind communication from the Eton
library. Should you be a prisoner in——street
will you suffer me to bring the <abbr rend=spell>MS</abbr> to town
about the middle of December, and then give me
your opinion of its value, age, &c. The master
of the Charter-House, [Dr. Raine] whom I
hope soon to greet by some other title, will I am
sure, have the goodness to forward this petition
to you.

“Charles Hayes, who, with his wife is now on a
visit to us, desires his kindest remembrance.
Mrs. Goodall is fatigued to death with nursing a
sick nephew and niece, and I am sorry to add
that I am on the invalid list myself, but we hope
to be all well in the course of a few days. She
unites in every good wish with

Dear Porson,

Yours most faithfully,

J. GOODALL.”
.pm letter-end

.tb


<i>From Mr. William Laing of Edinburgh to
Mr. Porson.</i>

.pm letter-start
“<i>Edinburgh, 3d of Jan. 1807.</i>

“Sir,—The edition of Herodotus being now
compleated after the plan you proceeded on, I
have taken the liberty of dedicating to you,
which I hope will meet your approbation. Mr.
Dunbar who has succeeded poor Mr. Dalzel has
paid the utmost attention to it. I shall order
Cuthell to forward a copy for your use. A
// File: 303.png
.pn +1
selection has been made of the best notes from
Wesseling; which with his Index Rerum, will
make it very compleat. I return you my best thanks
for the trouble you voluntarily undertook in promoting
this speculation. I hope soon to see you
in town, and shall personally repeat my obligations.

“I am about to print a new and elegant edition
of Pindar in two volumes from Heyne’s—You see
there is still some spirit for enterprize existing
here.

“I hope all my little editions will possess
beauty and correctness. I believe you have still
a volume of Herodotus which belongs to a person
here who wants it. Please deliver it to my son
who will call for it.

I remain with the highest respect,

Sir, your very obedient servant,

WILLIAM LAING.”
.pm letter-end

.tb


<i>From Dr. Charles Burney to Mr. Porson.</i>

.pm letter-start
“<i>Greenwich, June <abbr=twentieth>20th</abbr>, 1808.</i>

“My dear Porson,—My friends at Cambridge
direct me to request you will go down as speedily
as may be, to vote, and collect votes, for
a degree of <abbr rend=spell>M. A.</abbr> to be conferred on me. Now
though I know your objections to expeditions of
such a nature, yet I cannot help intreating you,
if you have not sound reasons against it to go
down and aid my cause.
// File: 304.png
.pn +1

“Kaye tells me that no time is to be lost. So
if you can, pack up a small portion of wardrobe
and visit <i>alma mater</i>, so will you greatly oblige
and favor

C. BURNEY.”
.pm letter-end

.tb


<i>From Dr. Davy, Master of Gonville and Caius
College, Cambridge, to Mr. Porson.</i>

.pm letter-start
“<i>Caius Coll. Tuesday 21st June, 1808.</i>

“My dear Porson—I take the liberty of telling
you, in case it should affect any of your movements,
that Dr. Burney’s mandamus will be
voted for on Friday next, at 2 o’clock precisely.
Every thing seems in his favour.

Your’s most truly,

M. DAVY.”
.pm letter-end

.tb


<i>From Thomas Tyrwhitt, <abbr=Esquire>Esq.</abbr> to Mr. James Perry,
Morning Chronicle office, Strand.</i>

.pm letter-start
“<i>Carlton House, Feb. 12th, 1805.</i>

“Dear Sir,—Do pray at your convenience inform
me of the address of Mr. Porson, as some
papers have been found in the collection of the
late Sir William Hamilton respecting the Papiri,
which are very interesting; and several MSS so
clearly written out, as to be ready for the opinion
of Mr. Porson, the only person in my opinion fit
to inspect them in the whole kingdom.

Your very faithful and obedient servant,

THOMAS TYRWHITT.”
.pm letter-end
// File: 305.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=art78
HISTORY OF SEPULCHRAL MONUMENTS.
.sp 2
In the early ages of Christianity the honour of
being deposited within the walls of the church
was reserved to martyrs; and it was the request
of the emperor Constantine in imitation of this
holy mode of interment, that after his death, his
remains might be allowed to lie in the porch of the
basilica of the Apostles, which he himself had
erected in Constantinople. Hence the eloquent
Chrysostom, when speaking of the triumphs of
Christianity, exultingly observes, in allusion to this
circumstance, that the Cæsars, subdued by the
humble fishermen whom they had persecuted, now
appeared as suppliants before them, and gloried
in occupying the place of porters at the doors of
their sepulchres. Bishops and priests distinguished
by their learning, zeal, and sanctity,
were gradually permitted to share the honours
of the martyrs, and to repose with them within
the sanctuary itself. A pious wish in some to be
deposited in the neighbourhood of such holy
persons, and to rest under the shadow of the
altars; in others an absurd love of distinction
even beyond the grave; to which may be added,
that the clergy, by making such a distinction
expensive, rendered it enviable; so that by
// File: 306.png
.pn +1
degrees, all the wholesome restrictions of antiquity
were broken through, and at length the noblest
public edifices, the temples of the <sc>Eternal</sc>, the
seats of holiness and purity, were converted into
so many dormitories of the dead.

Our present business is to investigate the
antiquity and variety of sepulchral monuments,
which have been erected as memorials of the
illustrious dead, in the cathedral, conventual,
and parish churches of this island. During the
time of our Saxon ancestors, it is probable, that
few or no monuments of this kind were erected;
at least, being usually placed in the churches
belonging to the greater abbeys, they felt the
stroke of the general dissolution, and it is believed
there are now scarcely any extant. Those we
meet with for the kings of that race, such as Ina
at Wells;[#] Osric, at Gloucester; Sebba and
Ethelbert, which were in Old <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Paul’s, or
where-ever else they may occur, are undoubtedly
cenotaphs, erected in later ages by the several
abbeys and convents of which these royal personages
were the founders, in gratitude to such
generous benefactors.

The period immediately after the conquest
was not a time for people to think of such
memorials for themselves, or friends. Few could
// File: 307.png
.pn +1
then tell how long the lands they enjoyed would
remain their own; and most indeed were put
into the hands of new possessors, who, frequently,
as we find in Domesday Book, held thirty or
forty manors, or more, at a time. All <i>then</i> above
the degree of servants, were soldiers, the sword
alone made the gentleman, and accordingly on a
strict inquiry, we shall meet with few or no
monuments of that age, except for the kings,
royal family, or some few of the chief nobility
and leaders, among which, those for the Veres,
Earls of Oxford, at Earl’s Colne, in Essex, are
some of the most ancient. It is probable that
this state of things, so far as regards sepulchral
monuments, continued through the troublesome
reign of Stephen, and during the confusion which
prevailed while the barons’ wars subsisted, and
until the ninth year of king Henry the third, 1224.

In that year Magna Charta being confirmed,
and every man’s security better established,
property became more dispersed, manors were
in more divided hands, and the lords of them
began to settle on their possessions in the country.
In that age many parish churches were built, and
it is not improbable that the care of a resting-place
for their bodies, and monuments to preserve
their memories, became more general and diffused.

In country parish churches, the ancient monuments
are usually found either in the chancel, or
in small chapels, or side aisles, which have been
built by the lords of manors, and patrons of
// File: 308.png
.pn +1
the churches, (which for the most part went
together,) and being designed for burying places
for their families, were frequently endowed with
chantries, in which priests officiated, and offered
up prayers for the souls of their founder and his
progenitors.

The tracing out, therefore, of such founders,
will frequently help us to the knowledge of an
ancient tomb which is found placed near the
altar of such chantries. If there are more than
one, they are, probably, for succeeding lords,
and where there have been found ancient monuments
in the church, also, besides what are in
such chapels or aisles, they may be supposed to
have been erected in memory of lords, prior to
the foundation of the buildings.
.sp 2
.h3
CROSS-LEGGED MONUMENTS.
.sp 2
The first species of monument, of which I propose
to give the history, is that denominated
<i>cross-legged</i>, from its having the recumbent effigy
of the deceased upon it, represented in armour,
with the legs crossed. During the Norman period
of our history, the holy war, and vows of
pilgrimage to Palestine, were esteemed highly
meritorious. The religious order of laymen, the
knights templars, were received, cherished, and
enriched throughout Europe, and the individuals
of that community, after death, being usually
buried cross-legged, in token of the banner under
which they fought, and completely armed in
regard to their being soldiers, this sort of monument
// File: 309.png
.pn +1
grew much in fashion, and though all the
effigies with which we meet in that shape are
commonly called knights templars, yet it is certain
that many of them do not represent persons
of that order; and Mr. Lethieullier says (<i>Archæologia,
<abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 2. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 292</i>) that he had rarely found
any of these monuments which he could with
certainty say had been erected to the memory of
persons who had belonged to that community.

The order of knights templars had its rise but
in the year 1118, and in 1134, we find Robert
duke of Normandy, son of William the conqueror,
represented in this manner on his tomb in
Gloucester cathedral.[#]—Henry Lacy, Earl of
// File: 310.png
.pn +1
Lincoln, was represented thus on his fine tomb,
which was in <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Paul’s cathedral, before the fire
of London. And in the Temple church there
still remain the cross-legged effigies of William
Marshall, Earl of Pembroke, who died in 1219;
William his son, who died in 1231; and Gilbert,
another son, who died in 1241; none of whom
it is believed were of the order of Templars.

If these monuments were designed to denote
at least, that the persons, to whose memory they
were erected, had been in the Holy Land, yet
// File: 311.png
.pn +1
all who had been there did not follow this fashion,
for Edmund Crouchback, Earl of Lancaster,
second son of king Henry the third, had been
there, and yet, as appears by his monument, still
in being in Westminster-abbey, he is not represented
cross-legged.[#] However, it seems to have
been a prevailing fashion till the sixth year of
Edward the second, 1312, when the order
of Templars coming to destruction, and into the
highest contempt, their fashions of all kinds seem
to have been totally abolished.

By this it may be determined that all those
effigies, either of wood or stone, which we find
in country churches, whether in niches in the
walls or on table tombs, and represented in complete
armour, with a shield on the left arm, and
the right hand grasping the sword, cross-legged,
and a lion, talbot, or some animal couchant at
the feet, have been set up between the ninth of
// File: 312.png
.pn +1
Henry the third, 1224, and the seventh of Edward
the second, 1313, and what corroborates this
opinion is, that whenever any such figures are
certainly known, either by the arms on the shield,
or by uninterrupted tradition, they have always
been found to fall within that period, and whenever,
says Mr. Lethieullier in the before mentioned
paper, I have met with such monument,
totally forgotten, I have, on searching for the
owners of the church and manor, found some
person or other, of especial note, who lived in that
age, and left little room to doubt but it was his
memory which was intended to be preserved.

It must, however, be acknowledged that this
sort of monument did not entirely cease after the
year 1312, for there is one in the church of
Leekhampton, in Gloucestershire, which, by
tradition, is said to be for Sir John Gifford, who
died possessed of that manor, in the third of king
Edward the third, 1328.

The <abbr=Reverend>Rev.</abbr> Dr. Nash, in his History of Worcester,
has the following observations on this sort of
monument:—“It is an opinion which universally
prevails, with regard to the cross-legged monuments,
that they were all erected to the memory
of knights templars; now, to me, it is very
evident that not one of them belonged to that
order, but as Mr. Habingdon, in describing those
at Alvechurch, hath justly expressed it, to
‘Knights of the Holy Voyage,’ for the order of
// File: 313.png
.pn +1
knights templars followed the rule of the canons
regular of <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Augustin, and as such were under
a vow of celibacy. Now there is scarcely any one
of these monuments which is certainly known for
whom it was erected, but it is as certain that the
person it represents was a married man.

“The knights templars always wore a white
habit, with a red cross on the left shoulder. I
believe not a single instance can be produced of
either the mantle or cross being carved on any of
these monuments, which surely would not have
been omitted, as by it they were distinguished
from all other orders, had these been really designed
to represent knights templars.

“Lastly, this order was not confined to England
only, but dispersed itself all over Europe,
yet it will be very difficult to find one cross-legged
monument any where out of England;
whereas no doubt they would have abounded in
France, Italy, and elsewhere, had it been a
fashion peculiar to that famous order.

“But though for these reasons I cannot allow
the cross-legged monuments to have been erected
for knights templars, yet they have some relation
to them; being memorials of those zealous
devotees, who had either been in Palestine, personally
engaged in what is called the Holy War,
or had laid themselves under a vow to go thither,
though perhaps they were prevented from it by
death; some few indeed might possibly be
// File: 314.png
.pn +1
erected to the memory of persons who had made
pilgrimages thither, merely out of devotion;
among the latter probably was the lady of the
family of Metham, of Metham in Yorkshire, to
whose memory a cross-legged monument was
placed in a chapel adjoining the once collegiate
church of Howden, in Yorkshire, and is at this
day remaining, together with that of her husband
on the same tomb.

“As this religious madness lasted no longer
than the reign of our Henry the third, (the
seventh and last crusade being published in the
year 1268) and the whole order of knights
templars dissolved in the seventh of Edward
the second; military expeditions to the Holy
Land, as well as devout pilgrimages thither had
their period by the year 1312, consequently none
of those cross-legged monuments are of a later
date than the reign of Edward the second, or
the beginning of Edward the third, nor of an
earlier than that of king Stephen, when those
expeditions first took place in this kingdom.”
.sp 2
.h3
THE FOLLOWING RULES WERE OBSERVED BY ANCIENT SCULPTORS IN ERECTING SEPULCHRAL MONUMENTS.[#]
.sp 2
Kings and princes, in what part, or by what
means soever, they died, were represented upon
// File: 315.png
.pn +1
their tombs clothed with their coats of arms,
their shield, bourlet or pad, crown, crest, supporters,
lambrequins or <i>mantlings</i>, orders, and
devices, upon their effigies, and round about
their tombs.

Knights and gentlemen might not be represented
with their coats of arms, unless they
had lost their lives in some battle, single combat
or rencontre with the prince himself, or in his
service, unless they died and were buried within
their own manors and lordships; and then to
shew they died a natural death in their beds,
they were represented with their coat of armour,
ungirded, without a helmet, bareheaded, their
eyes closed, their feet resting against the back of
a greyhound, and without any sword.

Those who died on the day of battle, or in
any mortal conflict on the side of the victorious
party, were to be represented with a drawn
sword in their right hand, the shield in their
left, their helmet on their head, (which some
think ought to be closed and the vizor let down,
as a sign that they fell fighting against their
enemies) having their coats of arms girded over
their armour, and their feet resting on a lion.

Those who died in captivity, or before they
had paid their ransom, were figured on their
tombs without spurs or helmets, without coats
of arms, and without swords, the scabbard thereof
only girded to, and hanging at their side.
// File: 316.png
.pn +1

Those who fell on the side of the vanquished
in a rencontre or battle were to be represented
without coats of arms, the sword at their side
and in the scabbard, the vizor raised and open,
their hands joined before their breasts, and their
feet resting against the back of a dead and overthrown
lion.

Those who had been vanquished and slain in
the lists in a combat of honour were to be placed
on their tomb armed at all points, their battle-axe
lying by them, the left arm crossed over the
right.

Those who were victorious in the lists were
exhibited on their tombs armed at all points, their
battle-axe in their arms, the right arm crossed
over the left.

It was customary to represent ecclesiastical
persons on their tombs clothed in their respective
sacerdotal habits. The canons with the surplice,
square cap, and aumasse or amice, that is the
undermost part of the priest’s habit.

The abbots were represented with their
mitres and crosiers turned to the left.

The bishops, with their great copes, their
gloves in their hands, holding their crosiers with
their left hands and seeming to give their benediction
with the right, their mitres on their heads
and their armorial bearings round their tombs
supported by angels.

The popes, cardinals, patriarchs, and archbishops
// File: 317.png
.pn +1
were likewise all represented in their official
habits.

The editors of the Antiquarian Repertory
(<abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 2. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 226.) have given the following additional
particulars relating to these monuments:—

“Although the figures represented on tombs
with their legs crossed, are commonly stiled
Knights Templars, there are divers circumstances
which intitled other persons to be so represented.
The first, having served personally, though for
hire in the Holy Land. Secondly, having made a
vow to go thither, though prevented by sickness
or death. Thirdly, the having contributed to
the fitting out of soldiers or ships for that service.
Fourthly, having been born with the army in
Palestine. And lastly, by having been considerable
benefactors to the order of Knights
Templars, persons were rendered partakers of
the merits and honours of that fraternity, and
buried with their distinctions, an idea which
has been more recently adopted abroad by many
great personages, who have been interred in the
habits of Capuchins. Indeed the admission of
laymen to the fraternity of a religious order was
no uncommon circumstance in former days.

“So long as the Knights Templars remained
in estimation it is probable that persons availed
themselves of that privileged distinction, but as at
its dissolution the Knights were accused of divers
enormous crimes, it is not likely any one would
// File: 318.png
.pn +1
chuse to claim brotherhood with them, or hand
themselves or friends to posterity as members of
a society held in detestation all over Europe, so
that cross-legged figures, or monuments, may
pretty safely be estimated as <i>prior</i> to the year
1312, when that dissolution took place, or at
most they cannot exceed it by above sixty or
seventy years, as persons of sufficient age to be
benefactors before that event, would not, according
to the common age of man, outlive them
more than that term.”
.sp 2
.h3
CROSS-LEGGED MONUMENTS IN THE TEMPLE CHURCH.[#]
.sp 2
<i>Geoffrey de Magnaville, first Earl of Essex.</i>

(1148.)

He is represented in mail with a surcoat, and
round helmet flatted on the top, with a nose
piece, which was of iron to defend the nose from
swords. His head rests on a cushion placed
lozenge fashion, his right hand on his breast, a
long sword at his right side, and on his left arm
a long pointed shield, charged with an escarbuncle
on a diapered field. This is the first instance
in England of arms on a sepulchral
figure.

This Earl, driven to despair by the confiscation
of his estates by king Stephen, indulged in
every act of violence, and making an attack on
// File: 319.png
.pn +1
the castle of Burwell, was there mortally wounded,
and was carried off by the Templars, who
as he died under sentence of excommunication,
declined giving him Christian burial, but wrapping
his body up in lead, hung it on a crooked
tree in the orchard of the Old Temple, London.
William, prior of Walden, having obtained absolution
for him of the Pope, made application
for his body, for the purpose of burying it at
Walden, upon which the Templars took it down,
and deposited it in the cemetery of the New
Temple.
.sp 2
<i>William Marshall, Earl of Pembroke.</i>

This monument represents a knight in mail
with a surcoat, his helmet more completely
rounded than the adjoining one, and the cushion
as in all the rest laid straiter under his head.
He is drawing his short dagger or broken sword
with his right hand, and on his left arm has a
short pointed shield, on which are his arms, per
pale, <i>or</i> and <i>vert</i>, a lion rampant, <i>gules</i>, armed
and langued, <i>gules</i>, below his knees are bands or
garters, as if to separate the cuisses from the
greaves; his legs are crossed, and under his feet
is a lion couchant.

The first account of this William is in the
<abbr='twenty-eighth'>28th</abbr> of Henry the second, when Henry son of
that prince, who had behaved himself rebelliously
against his father, lying on his death bed, with
great penitence delivered to him, as to his most
// File: 320.png
.pn +1
intimate friend, his cross to carry to Jerusalem.
He obtained from Richard the first on his first
coming to England after his father’s death,
Isabel, daughter and heiress of Richard, Earl of
Pembroke, in marriage, and with her that earldom.
He died advanced in years at his manor
of Caversham, near Reading, in 1219. His body
was carried first to Reading abbey, then to
Westminster, and last to the Temple church,
where it was solemnly interred.
.sp 2
<i>Robert Lord Ros of Hamlake.</i>

The most elegant of all the figures in the
Temple church represents a comely young knight,
in mail, and a flowing mantle, with a kind of
cowl; his hair neatly curled at the sides, and
his crown appearing to be shaven. His hands
are elevated in a praying posture, and on his left
arm is a short pointed shield, charged with three
water-bougets, the arms of the family of Ros.
He has at his left side a long sword, and the
armour of his legs, which are crossed, has a ridge
or seam up the front, continued over the knee,
and forming a kind of garter below the knee: at
his feet a lion.

This Robert Lord Ros was surnamed <i>Fursan</i>,
and incurred the displeasure of king Richard the
first, but for what offence is not said. He was
one of the chief barons who undertook to compel
king John’s observance of the great charter.
At the close of his life he took upon him the
// File: 321.png
.pn +1
order of the Templars, and died in their habit.
He was buried in this church in 1227.
.sp 2
<i>William Marshall, Earl of Pembroke.</i>

The next figure but one to that of the Earl of
Pembroke, may be for William Marshall, eldest
son of that Earl. It is a cross-legged knight in
mail, with a surcoat, his helmet round, surmounted
with a kind of round cap, and the mouth piece
up, his hands folded on his breast, his shield long
and pointed, and now plain: a very long sword
at his right side; the belt from which his shield
hangs studded with quatre-foils, and that of his
sword with lozenges.

This William Marshall died without issue in
1231, and was buried in this church near the
grave of his father.
.sp 2
<i>Uncertain Monuments in the Temple Church.</i>

The five figures in the north group of this
church are not ascertained absolutely to whom
they belong. Camden and Weever ascribe one
of them to Gilbert Marshall, third son of the first
William, who on the death of his brother succeeded
to the whole of the paternal inheritance,
and lost his life at a tournament at Ware in
1241. His bowels were buried before the high
altar of the church of our Lady at Hertford, and
his body in the Temple Church, London, near
his father and brother.

In the present state of these monuments it is
almost impossible to ascertain the property of
// File: 322.png
.pn +1
more than one of the Marshall family. The two
effigies whose belts have the same ornaments
were it is probable of one family.

It may be observed that Magnaville, William
Marshall, jun. and the last figure in the north
groupe have their legs crossed in an unusual manner.
They lie on their backs and yet cross their
legs as if they lay on their sides. So were those
of Henry Lacy, Earl of Lincoln, 1312, in old <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr>
Paul’s.

The spurs of all are remarkably short, and
seem rather straps with rowels. Not above two
or three have the long pointed shoe, and two have
their surcoats exactly reaching to the knee,
whereas the others are of different lengths and
fall more easily.

Weever informs us that sepulture in this
church was much affected by Henry the third
and his nobility. Stowe has determined that
four of the cross-legged figures belong to the
three earls of Pembroke and Robert Ros: “and
these are all,” says he, “that I can remember to
have read of.”

Mr. Gough relates, (he says from good
authority,) that a Hertfordshire baronet applied
for some of these cross-legged knights to grace
his newly erected parochial chapel, but the
society of Benchers, discovered their good sense,
as well as regard to antiquity, by refusing their
compliance.
// File: 323.png
.pn +1
.sp 2
.h3
TABLE TOMB.
.sp 2
To the cross-legged monument it is highly
probable, says Mr. Lethieullier, succeeded the
table tomb, with figures recumbent upon it, with
their hands joined in a praying posture, sometimes
with a rich canopy of stone over them,
sometimes without such canopy, and again, some
very plain without any figures. Round the edge
of these for the most part were inscriptions on
brass plates, which are now too frequently destroyed.

The table monument, however, came in more
early than Mr. L. supposes.

The most ancient monument of this kind that
is extant, in England at least, of the sovereigns
of this kingdom, is that of king John, in the
choir of Worcester Cathedral.[#] His effigy lies
// File: 324.png
.pn +1
on the tomb, crowned; in his right hand he
holds the sceptre, in his left a sword, the point of
which is received into the mouth of a lion
couchant at his feet. The figure is as large as
life. On each side of the head are cumbent
images, in small, of the bishops <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Oswald and
<abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Wulstan, represented as censing him.—This
monarch died in the year 1216. His bowels
were buried in Croxton abbey, and his body,
which was conveyed to Worcester from Newark,
was according to his desire, buried in that
Cathedral.
.sp 2
.h3
GRAVE STONES.
.sp 2
At the same time came in common use the
humble grave stone laid flat with the pavement,
sometimes with an inscription cut round the
border of the stone, sometimes enriched with
costly plates of brass, as every person who has
examined our cathedral and parish churches
cannot fail to have observed. But either avarice,
or an over zealous aversion to some words in the
inscription, has robbed most of these stones of
the brass which adorned them, and left the less
room for certainty when this fashion began.
// File: 325.png
.pn +1
Earlier than the fourteenth century very few have
been met with, and even towards the beginning
of that century it is thought they were but rare.
Mr. Lethieullier says that one was produced at a
meeting of the Society of Antiquaries, dated 1300.[#]
Weever mentions one in <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Paul’s for Richard
Newport, anno 1317, and gives another at
Berkhampstead in Hertfordshire, which he by
mistake dates 1306, the true date being 1356.
Upon the whole, where we have not a positive
date, it is hardly probable that any brass plate
met with on grave stones can be older than 1350,
and few so old, but from about 1380 they grew
into common use and remained so even to the
time of king James the first. Only after the
reign of Edward the sixth we find the old gothic
square letter changed into the roman round hand
and the phrase <i>Orate pro anima</i> universally
omitted.

Towards the latter end of the fourteenth
century a custom prevailed likewise of putting
the inscription in French and not in Latin. These
inscriptions are generally from 1350 to 1400,
and very rarely afterwards. John Stow has
indeed preserved two, which were in <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Martin’s
in the Vintry, dated 1310, and 1311.
// File: 326.png
.pn +1

The late editor of the Antiquities of Westminster
affirms (from what authority he does not
say) that stone coffins were never or rarely
used after the thirteenth century.[#] If this
// File: 327.png
.pn +1
assertion had been correct we should have had
an æra from whence to go upwards in search of
any of those monuments where the stone coffin
appears, as it frequently does, but there is reason
to doubt the accuracy of this author’s statement.

As Grecian architecture had a little dawning
in Edward the sixth’s time, and made a further
progress in the three succeeding reigns, we find,
in the great number of monuments which were
then erected, the small column introduced with
its base and capital, sometimes supporting an
arch, sometimes an architrave, but every where
mixed with them, may be observed a great deal
of the Gothic ornaments retained, as small spires,
ill carved images, small square roses and other
foliage, painted and gilt, which sufficiently
denote the age which made them, though no
inscriptions are left.
.sp 2
.h3
HERALDIC SYMBOLS.
.sp 2
Some knowledge of heraldry is very necessary
in monumental researches, a coat of arms,
device, or rebus, very often remains where not
the least word of an inscription appears, and
where indeed very probably there never was any.
// File: 328.png
.pn +1

Armorial bearings seem to have taken their
rise in this kingdom in the reign of king Richard
the first, and by little and little to have become
hereditary; it was accounted most honourable to
carry those arms which the bearers had displayed
in the Holy Land, against the professed enemies
of Christianity, but they were not fully established
until the latter end of the reign of king Henry
the third.

King Richard the first after his return from
his captivity in Austria, had a new great seal
made, on which seal he first bore three lions
passant guardant for his arms, which from this
time became the hereditary arms of the kings of
England.

The arms assigned or attributed to the kings
of the Norman dynasty, namely <i>gules</i>, two lions
passant guardant, <i>or</i>, Mr. Sandford, in his Genealogical
History of England, says he could not
find had ever been used by those Princes, either
on monuments, coins, or seals, but that historians
had assigned or fixed them upon the Norman
line to distinguish it from that of their successors
the Plantagenets, who bore <i>gules</i>, three lions passant
guardant, <i>or</i>.[#] According to the opinion of
modern genealogists, king Henry the second, who
// File: 329.png
.pn +1
bore two lions for his arms, in the manner before
mentioned, added, on his marriage with Eleanor
of Aquitaine, the arms of that dutchy, namely
<i>gules</i>, a lion, <i>or</i>, to his own, and so was the first
king of England who bore three lions; but for
this there is no better proof than for those assigned
to the Norman dynasty, for the arms of king
Henry the second upon his monument at Fontevraud
in Normandy, are on a shield of a modern
form, and on the same monument are escutcheons
with both impalements and quarterings which
were not used till a hundred years after his death.

King Edward the first was the first son of a
king of England that differenced his arms with
a file, and the first king of England that bore his
arms on the caparisons of his horse.

Margaret of France, second wife of king
Edward the first, was the first queen of England
that bore her arms <i>dimidiated</i> with her husband’s
in one escutcheon, that is, both escutcheons
being parted by a perpendicular line, or <i>per pale</i>,
the dexter side of the husband’s shield, is joined
to the sinister side of the wife’s, which kind of
bearing is more ancient than the impaling of the
entire coats of arms.

King Edward the third, in the year 1339,
having taken upon him the title of king of France,
was the first of our kings who quartered arms,
bearing those of France and England, quarterly,
and so careful were the kings, his successors, in
// File: 330.png
.pn +1
marshalling the arms of both kingdoms in the
same shield, that when Charles the sixth, king
of France, changed the semée of fleurs de lys
into three, our king Henry the fifth did the like,[#]
and so it continued till the union of Great Britain
with Ireland in 1801, when the arms of
France were relinquished.

The first example of the quartering of arms,
is found in Spain, when the kingdoms of Castile
and Leon were united under Ferdinand the third,
and was afterwards imitated, as above described,
by king Edward the third. Eleanor of Castile,
// File: 331.png
.pn +1
his queen, introduced this mode of bearing arms
into England, in which she was followed by the
king, her husband.

Until the time of king Edward the third, we
find no coronets round the heads of peers. The
figure upon the monument of John of Eltham,
second son of king Edward the third, who died
in 1334, and is buried in Westminster abbey, is
adorned with a diadem, composed of a circle of
greater and less leaves or flowers, and is the most
ancient portraiture of an earl, says Sandford,
that has a coronet. For the effigies of Henry
Lacy, earl of Lincoln, on his tomb in Old <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr>
Paul’s, had the head encompassed with a circle
only, and that of William de Valence, earl of
Pembroke, half brother of king John, who died
in 1304, and is buried in <abbr=Saint>St.</abbr> Edmund’s chapel,
in Westminster abbey, has only a circle, enriched
and embellished with stones of several
colours, but without either points, rays, or leaves.

John Hastings, earl of Pembroke, who died
in 1375, was the first subject who bore two coats
quarterly.

Richard the second was the first of the English
kings, who used supporters to his arms.

Henry the sixth was the first of our kings who
wore an arched crown, which has been ever
since continued by his successors.[#]
// File: 332.png
.pn +1

Henry the eighth was the first king of England
that added to his shield, the garter and the
crown, in imitation of which, the knights of the
garter, in the latter end of his reign, caused their
escutcheons on their stalls at Windsor, to
be encompassed with the garter, and those who
were dukes, marquesses, or earls, had their
coronets placed on their shields, which has been
so practised ever since.

Queen Elizabeth was the first sovereign who
used in her arms, a harp crowned, as an ensign
for the kingdom of Ireland.

King James the first was the first of our monarchs,
who quartered the arms of England,
Scotland, and Ireland in one shield.
// File: 333.png
.pn +1

The number of princes of the blood royal of
the houses of York and Lancaster, may easily
be distinguished, by the labels on their coats of
arms, which are different for each, and very often
their devices are added.

Where the figure of a woman is found with
arms both on her kirtle and mantle, those on the
kirtle are always her own family’s, and those on
the mantle, her husband’s.

The first instance of arms on sepulchral monuments,
in England, are those on the tomb of
Geoffrey de Magnaville, first Earl of Essex, (so
created in 1148,) in the Temple church, in London.
Armorial bearings were used in France,
on monuments, forty years before we find them
in England.

Very intimately connected with the ornaments
and devices upon sepulchral monuments are the
figures and dresses of our early monarchs found
on their great seals, and of the principal nobility
of those times on their seals. King Henry the
third was the first English sovereign who wore
upon his helmet a crown, and he is also the first
king who is depicted upon his great seal as wearing
rowels in his spurs in the manner in which
they are now used, all the former kings using
spurs with a single point or spike from the heel.

Sandford, in his Genealogical History of
England, says, that the arms upon the seal of
// File: 334.png
.pn +1
John, Earl of Morton, (afterwards king John,)
namely, two lions passant, are the first which he
had seen upon any seal of the royal family. This
was in the reign of king Henry the second.
.sp 2
.h3
MONUMENTS FOR ECCLESIASTICS.
.sp 2
As to monuments for the several degrees of
churchmen, as bishops, abbots, priors, monks,
&c. or of religious women, they are easily to be
distinguished from other persons, but equally
difficult to assign to their true owners. Among
these, as among the before-mentioned monuments,
for the most part the stone effigies are the
oldest, with the mitre, crosier, and other proper
insignia, and very often wider at the head than
feet, having, indeed, been the cover to the stone
coffins in which the body was deposited.

When brass plates came in fashion they were
likewise much used by bishops, &c. many of
whose grave stones remain at this day, very
richly adorned, and in many, the indented marble
shews that they have been so. In Salisbury
cathedral, says Mr. Lethieullier, I found two
very ancient stone figures of bishops, which were
brought from Old Sarum, and are consequently
older than the time of king Henry the third. In
that church, likewise, the pompous marble which
lies over Nicholas Longespee, bishop of that see,
and son of the, Earl of Salisbury, who died in the
year 1297, appears to have been richly plated,
though the brass is now quite gone, and is one of
// File: 335.png
.pn +1
the most early of that kind which has been met
with. Frequently, where there are no effigies,
crosiers or crosses denote an ecclesiastic. The
latter have been met with, but with little difference
in their form, for every order from a bishop to a
parish priest.
.sp 2
.h3
THE SKELETON MONUMENT.
.sp 2
One sort of monument more may be mentioned,
which is somewhat peculiar; this is the representation
of a skeleton in a shroud, lying either
under or upon, but generally under a table tomb.
A monument of this kind is to be met with in
almost all the cathedral and conventual churches
throughout England, and scarcely ever more than
one, but to what age the unknown ones are to be
attributed, we have no clue to guide us, since
there is one in York cathedral for Robert Claget,
treasurer of that church, as ancient as 1241, and
in Bristol cathedral, Paul Bush, the first bishop
of that see, who died so late as 1558, is represented
in the same manner, and some of these
figures may be found in every age between.

These skeleton monuments represent the
figure of a man emaciated by extreme sickness,
or taken immediately after death; they are
usually of ecclesiastics, and placed with another
figure of the same prelate, as a contrast to his
pride, in pontificals. The art of the sculptor is
more apparent in the first mentioned, because
much anatomical accuracy was required.
// File: 336.png
.pn +1

One of the earliest monuments of a warrior so
contrasted is that of John de Arundel, slain in
the French wars, under the Duke of Bedford.
It remains in the sepulchral chapel of that noble
family at Arundel, and is finely sculptured in
white marble. The dead figure, is indeed a
masterly performance, and has every appearance
of having been originally modelled from nature.

In Exeter Cathedral there is an altar tomb,
upon which lies the effigy of bishop Marshall, who
died in 1203, dressed in his episcopal robes, with
a mitre on his head, his right hand lying upon his
breast, with the palm upwards, the fore finger,
ring finger, and thumb extended, and the other
fingers closed. Near this monument in a low
niche, lies the figure of a skeleton, cut in free
stone, with the following inscription over it:—“Ista
figura docet nos omnes premeditari qualiter
ipsa nocet mors quando venit dominari.”

The tomb of bishop Beckington in Wells
Cathedral, who died in 1464, has his effigy in
alabaster, habited in his episcopal robes; and
underneath is a representation of his skeleton.

.fn #
In the centre of the nave of Wells Cathedral there is a
large stone that had formerly upon it an effigy in brass,
which was generally ascribed to king Ina, the founder of
that church.
.fn-
.fn #
This is one of the earliest specimens we have of the
cross-legged monument. It is made of Irish oak, as well the
table part, as the effigy. On the pannels are the arms of
several of the worthies, and at the foot the arms of France and
England, quarterly, which shews these escutcheons to have
been painted since the reign of king Henry the fourth. This
monument stood entire until the parliamentary army, during
the Cromwell usurpation, having garrisoned the city of
Gloucester against the king, the soldiers tore it to pieces,
which being about to be burned, were bought of them by
Sir Humphrey Tracy, of Stanway, and privately laid up
until the Restoration, when the pieces were put together,
repaired, and ornamented, and again placed in their former
situation by Sir Humphrey, who also added a wire screen for
their future preservation. There is an engraving of this
monument in Sandford’s Genealogical History, page 16,
which Rudder, (<i>History of Gloucester</i>, <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 126.) calls a noble
representation of it.

Gibbon has left us the following account of this prince,
(Rom. Hist. <abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> 11. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 32)—“Robert, Duke of Normandy,
one of the chiefs of the first crusade, on his father’s death
was deprived of the kingdom of England, by his own indolence
and the activity of his brother Rufus. The worth of
Robert was degraded by an excessive levity and easiness of
temper; his cheerfulness seduced him to the indulgence of
pleasure, his profuse liberality impoverished the prince and
people; his indiscriminate clemency multiplied the number
of offenders; and the amiable qualities of a private man,
became the essential defects of a sovereign. For the trifling
sum of ten thousand marks (the one hundredth part of its
present yearly revenue) he mortgaged Normandy during his
absence in the first crusade, to the English usurper; but his
behaviour in the Holy War, announced in Robert, a reformation
of manners, and restored him in some degree to the
public esteem.”

There is an engraving of Robert, Duke of Normandy, in
Ducarel’s Anglo-Norman Antiq. Plate 5.

The monument of William, Earl of Flanders, son of
Robert, Duke of Normandy, as also two of his seals, are
engraven in Sandford’s Genealogical Hist. <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 17.
.fn-
.fn #
The monument of Edmund Crouchback has been very
lofty; it was painted, gilt, and inlaid with stained glass. The inside
of the canopy has represented the sky with stars, but, by
age, is changed into a dull red. On the base, towards the area
are the remains of ten knights, armed, with banners, surcoats
of armour, and cross-belted, representing, undoubtedly, his
expedition to the Holy Land, the number exactly corresponding
with what Matthew Paris reports, namely, Edmund and
his elder brother, four earls and four knights, of whom some are
still discoverable, particularly the Lord Roger Clifford, as
were formerly in Waverly’s time, William de Valence and
Thomas de Clare.
.fn-
.fn #
These rules are extracted from the Antiquarian Repertory,
<abbr=volume>vol.</abbr> <abbr=two>ii.</abbr> <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 124; and from the Introduction to Gough’s
“History of Sepulchral Monuments,” <abbr=page>p.</abbr> 115.
.fn-
.fn #
This account of these monuments is extracted from
Gough’s “History of Sepulchral Monuments.”
.fn-
.fn #
This monument was asserted by Green, in his History of
Worcester, to have been a cenotaph, and accordingly the
Dean and Chapter had determined on its removal, intending
to place it over the supposed remains of the king in the lady
chapel. But on opening the tomb on Monday, July the 17th,
1797, the royal remains were found therein in a stone coffin,
the internal measure of which from the feet to the top of the
excavation hollowed out for the head, was 5 feet 6 inches and
a half. The body was doubtless originally placed in the
coffin, nearly in the same form, and arrayed in such a robe as
the figure on the tomb, with his sword in his left hand, and
booted, but it was so much deranged as evidently to shew
that it had been disturbed, and that perhaps at its removal from
the place of its first interment in the lady chapel, if ever that
event had taken place, which seems to have been a controverted
point with historians. The most perfect part of the
body seemed to be the toes, on some of which the nails were
still distinguishable, but of what the dress had originally been
composed, could be only matter of conjecture. The influx
of people, eager to see the royal remains after an interment
of nearly 600 years, was so great as to be the cause of the
tomb being closed on the following day.
.fn-
.fn #
The monument of Walter de Langton, Dean of York,
who died in 1279, was the first in that Cathedral that had an
inscription upon it. It was destroyed by the Puritans during
the Cromwell Usurpation.
.fn-
.fn #
Coffins formed of a single stone, hollowed with a chissel,
are an improvement which has been attributed to the Romans.
Sometimes they were of marble. Some contained two or
more bodies, others only one, in which case, it was not
unusual for them to be made to fit the body, with cavities for
the reception of the head and arms, and other protuberances.

The solid stone or marble coffin, often curiously wrought,
was in use among the first christians in England, who, in all
probability, copied the customs of the Romans, after those
conquerors had quitted our island.—Stone coffins were disused
in the fifteenth century. None but opulent persons
were interred in coffins of this description; the body was
wrapped in fine linen, attired in the most honourable vestments,
and laid in spices. The coffin was placed no deeper
in the ground, than the thickness of a marble slab, or stone
to be laid over it, even with the surface of the pavement.
The coffin shaped stones which are frequently seen in churches
at the present day, have, in general, been the covers of stone
coffins.

The leaden coffin was also in use among the Romans, not
only for the reception of the body, but in many instances, for
the ashes and bones. It was adopted by the christians, and
continues in frequent use to the present time, among the
more opulent.

Alexander was buried in a golden coffin, by his successor
Ptolemy; and glass coffins have been found in England.

The oldest instance, on record, among us, of a coffin made
of wood, is that of king Arthur, who was buried in an entire
trunk of oak.

It was not till the latter end of the seventeenth or the beginning
of the eighteenth century, that coffins became in general
use in England. Before that time, there was, in every parish
church, a common coffin, in which the corpse was placed
and conveyed on a bier, from the residence of the deceased, to
the grave; it was then taken out of the coffin and interred.
Some of these common coffins yet remain in country churches.
.fn-
.fn #
The gold noble, or half mark, struck by king Edward
the third, in the seventeenth year of his reign, is the first
money on which the arms of England appear, namely, three
lions passant guardant.
.fn-
.fn #
The <i>three</i> fleurs de lys were used, on some occasions,
much earlier than this, both in France and England. There
is an angel of Philip de Valois, coined in 1340, with the
<i>three</i> fleurs de lys, which was probably done for the sake
of variation, king Edward having then lately taken the arms
<i>semée</i> de lys. Le Blanc mentions a charter of Philip, in
1355, with a seal of the arms in like manner. There is also
a groat of king John of France, with only <i>three</i> fleurs de lys,
though he used them likewise <i>semée</i>. But Charles the sixth,
who began his reign in 1380, constantly bore the <i>three</i> lys for
the arms of France, as they have been continued ever since.
As the English kings altered the arms of France, in imitation
of the French king, it is most likely that our Henry the fourth
who was contemporary with Charles the sixth, began this
practice. He did indeed bear the fleurs de lys <i>semée</i>, upon
his great seal, because it was his predecessor’s, but that he
bore the <i>three</i> lys upon other occasions is most likely, for so
they are seen at the head of his monument, at Canterbury,
and his son Henry, afterwards Henry the fifth, in like manner,
bore the <i>three</i> fleurs de lys upon his seal, annexed to
an indenture, so early as the sixth year of his father’s reign.
.fn-
.fn #
The coins of king Henry the sixth, both gold and silver,
are supposed to be distinguished from his father’s, by the
arched crown, surmounted with the orb and cross, being the
first of our kings who appears with an arched crown upon his
coins; but upon his great seal he has an open crown, <i>fleuri</i>,
with small pearls, upon points, between. This is likewise
the first time we see the orb with the cross upon the money,
though it had been used upon other occasions, by almost all
our kings, down from Edward the Confessor. The arched,
or close crown, is not of ancient use, except in the empire,
and thence, perhaps, called imperial. Some think Edward
the third first used it, because he was vicar-general of the
empire, and it is said that Henry the fifth had an imperial
crown made, but Henry the sixth had certainly the best pretence
to it, of any prince in Europe, of his time, being
crowned king both of France and England. But why he did
not bear it upon his great seal, as well as upon his coin, is
not easily resolved any more than that his successor should
bear it upon his great seal, and not upon his coins.
.fn-

FINIS.
.sp 4
.if h
.ce
<l>Footnotes</l>
.fm lz=h rend=no
.if-
.sp 4
.dv class='tnotes’
.ul
.it Transcriber’s Notes:
.ul indent=1
.if h
.it Footnotes have been collected at the end of the text, and are\
linked for ease of reference.
.if-
.if t
.it Text that was in italics is enclosed by underscores (<i>italics</i>).
.it Footnotes have been moved to follow the articles in which they\
are referenced.
.if-
.ul-
.ul-
.dv-